|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Gender and Sexuality |
|
STRAIGHT AIDS MYTH SHATTERED - NY POST |
Current rating: 3 |
by Paul King
(No verified email address) |
28 Mar 2004
|
|
"The legendary Cosmopolitan editor was vilified in 1993 when she published a piece called "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS." But she was right." - NY POST |
STRAIGHT AIDS MYTH SHATTERED
New York Post
March 19, 2004 --
THE public health experts - and their amen corner in the media - owe Helen Gurley Brown an apology.
The legendary Cosmopolitan editor was vilified in 1993 when she published a piece called "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS." But she was right.
Eleven years later, Details is asking: "Whatever Happened to AIDS and Straight Men?" The article states, "A disease-free man who has unprotected sex with a drug-free woman stands a one in 5 million chance of contracting HIV."
The story by Kevin Gray also cites a joke that made the rounds of the New York City Department of Health as statistics came in showing that the predicted spread of AIDS to heterosexuals wasn't happening:
"What do you call a man who got HIV from his girlfriend? . . . A liar."
"I feel somewhat vindicated," Brown told PAGE SIX.
Michael Fumento, who wrote the original 1990 book titled "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS," said, "I'm not waiting for an apology. It's not going to happen."
When Basic Books published Fumento's tome, "Distributors refused to handle it," he says. "Stores refused to carry it. And at many stores that did have it, clerks left it in the basement."
Celia Farber, who wrote an AIDS column in Spin magazine, was routinely attacked because she refused to rehash the propaganda put out by AmFAR and other groups.
"Everybody who was wrong got journalism awards. Everybody who was right got all but driven from the profession," Farber said.
Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn't want the disease to be known as "the gay plague," and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.
"They believed in what they were doing, not what they were saying," Fumento said. "They knew it was lies. They felt the end justified the means."
At a recent editorial meeting at Seed, the new science magazine, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Laurie Garrett supposedly threatened to quit when a colleague suggested a story about Peter Duesberg, a leading retrovirologist.
Duesberg lost his funding, his laboratory, and his students when he announced in 1987 that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. "He lost everything," said one insider. Duesberg switched to cancer research, and is now touted to win a Nobel Prize. |
See also:
http://www.dissidentaction.com
http://http;//www.virusmyth.com
|
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Re: STRAIGHT AIDS MYTH SHATTERED - NY POST |
by Paul King
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 1
28 Mar 2004
|
CAUCASIAN TEEN 'AIDS' CASES (entire USA) BETWEEN July 1983 and December 2001 = 1211 (male and female).
Source: - CDC
TWELVE HUNDRED AND ELEVEN in nearly 18 years or a mere 67 cases a year.
JUST OVER ONE CAUCASIAN TEEN 'AIDS' CASE PER U.S. STATE A YEAR.
HARDLY AN 'EPIDEMIC!
That figure of 1.28 cases per State is lower than gun shotdeaths in the Mac Arthur Park area of Los Angeles in a single month.
Check for yourself (don't take our word for it) at: - http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hasr1302/table7.htm
IN CONTRAST
In the same period people over 60 (caucasian) had 9,338 cases.
Those old folks must be sex mad - Nine times MORE sex than teenagers.
....or could it just be that 'AIDS' is not an std? Surely not? God forbid! Perish the thought! |
|
Plan to Battle AIDS Worldwide Is Falling Short |
by Donald G. McNeil Jr.
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 11
28 Mar 2004
|
More Proof That AIDS Afflicts Everyone in a Society,
Inadequacy of Bush AIDS Policy Undermines Weak Global Response, and the Pointlessness and Intellectual Bankruptcy of Pointing Fingers at Certain Groups as Having a Special Responsibility for the Crisis
Three years after the United Nations declared a worldwide offensive against AIDS and 14 months after President Bush promised $15 billion for AIDS treatment in poor countries, shortages of money and battles over patents have kept antiretroviral drugs from reaching more than 90 percent of the poor people who need them.
Progress in distributing the drugs, which have sharply cut the death rate in the United States and other Western countries, has been excruciatingly slow despite steep drops in their prices.
As a result, only about 300,000 people in the world's poorest nations are getting the drugs, of six million who need them, according to the World Health Organization.
Experts, advocacy groups and health officials agree that the delays, compounded by inadequate medical facilities and training in very poor countries, are likely to persist unless spending is stepped up sharply.
Early this month, Stephen Lewis, the special United Nations envoy for AIDS in Africa, conceded that the W.H.O.'s ambitious plan to have three million people in treatment by 2005 β announced on Dec. 1, World AIDS Day β was already collapsing from a lack of money. Donations to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria are now about $1.6 billion a year, barely 20 percent of what Secretary General Kofi Annan said was needed when he created the fund in 2001.
Saying that global contributions come to a tiny fraction of what is being spent on military operations and building civilian institutions in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mr. Lewis added that if the W.H.O. program failed, "there are no excuses left, no rationalizations to hide behind, no murky slanders to justify indifference β there will only be the mass graves of the betrayed."
While Mr. Bush promised in his 2003 State of the Union address to spend $15 billion over five years on AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean, his budget requests have fallen far short of that goal. For the most recent donation to the Global Fund, he requested only $200 million, although Congress authorized $550 million.
Nor have Europe and Asia been as generous as the fund had hoped.
Dr. Richard G. A. Feachem, a Briton who is the fund's executive director, put a brave face on the situation, describing current donations as "a steep upward flight path to our cruising altitude, which we anticipate to be $8 billion." To get there in the fund's first two years would be "inconceivable," he added. He is lobbying Congress for $1.2 billion for 2005.
At the same time, few people in poor countries have been able to get lower-priced generic antiretroviral drugs. While the generic drugs have been approved by the W.H.O., endorsed by the World Bank and used in several African countries, the Bush administration has so far paid only for medicines that are still under patent and cost much more.
For example, Daniel Berman, co-director of the Doctors Without Borders campaign for low-cost drugs, said that in Zimbabwe his organization planned to treat 1,000 patients with drugs from two approved Indian generic makers, Cipla Ltd. and Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd.
Both companies combine three antiretrovirals so that a day's dose is just two pills and the cost is $244 to $292 per patient per year. Meanwhile, Mr. Berman said, the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta plans to pay for the treatment of 1,000 Zimbabweans, buying the same three drugs separately from GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Boehringer-Ingelheim. The best prices available in Africa from those companies, he said, add up to $562 a year, and a daily dose is six pills.
Advocates of cheap drugs say the Bush administration has yielded to pressure from the pharmaceutical lobby to find ways to reject the generics.
On Friday, Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, and John McCain, Republican of Arizona, wrote a joint letter to the White House urging it to accept W.H.O.-approved generics.
In a separate letter, Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, accused the administration of trying to set standards for Indian generics higher than those for American ones.
A spokesman for Randall L. Tobias, the administration's AIDS coordinator, said any suggestion that he was snubbing generics was "utter nonsense."
"We will buy whatever drug is safe and effective at the lowest possible price," said the spokesman, Dr. Mark R. Dybul. "We don't care if it's made by Cipla or Ranbaxy, in South Africa or Brazil or Nigeria."
Mr. Tobias has scheduled a meeting in Botswana for Monday to ascertain whether the W.H.O.'s approval process is rigorous enough.
Dr. Lembit Rago, who leads the W.H.O. assessments, said he used "absolutely the same principles" as the Food and Drug Administration, and borrowed his inspectors from regulatory agencies in Canada, France, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. As soon as his office approved the Indian pills, he said, "a very cold wind began to blow from the U.S."
"It is no secret that Pharma is lobbying against us in a big way," he said.
A spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association of America, the industry's American lobbying group, said his association was "not involved in any way in this." But he called the Indian drugs "new combinations that have not been appropriately treated."
Dr. Dybul said Mr. Tobias wanted to see all the data the Indian companies gave the W.H.O.
A W.H.O. spokeswoman said the agency signed confidentiality agreements, but she said the Bush administration could ask the Indian companies for the data.
Against that backdrop, prices for both branded and generic medicines have plunged in the last two years. Last October, a foundation organized by former President Bill Clinton announced an agreement with Indian and South African generic makers to sell the drugs for $140 per patient per year if large orders were guaranteed, payment was in cash and the drug maker did not have to pay the legal and lobbying costs of getting each drug licensed in each country.
In January, Mr. Clinton announced that he had brokered another price-cut deal with five companies making AIDS tests. One of the companies, Becton, Dickinson & Company, dropped the cost of its CD-4 count, which measures immune cells, to as little as $3, from a high of $10.
On Dec. 9, with little fanfare, an important step took place in South Africa. Two pharmaceutical giants, Glaxo and Boehringer-Ingelheim, agreed to grant licenses to produce AIDS drugs to four generic companies from India and South Africa.
The companies will be allowed to sell the drugs anywhere in sub-Saharan Africa. In return, Glaxo and Boehringer will get royalties of 5 percent of sales. Under the threat of heavy fines, the companies had backed down from their original plan: a license for one small generic maker supplying only South Africa's public hospitals and royalties of 15 percent to 30 percent.
The Canadian government has proposed a law encouraging its drug makers to make cheap copies of drugs to treat AIDS and malaria for export to poor countries. The bill is bogged down in Parliament.
Treatment plans have varied wildly in different countries. South Africa, with the world's largest number of AIDS patients, was slow to roll out nationwide treatment because of years of opposition by President Thabo Mbeki. India, which has the second largest number, has been slow to negotiate low prices with its own generic companies. Brazil makes its own generic drugs. Romania buys only brand-name drugs, but its epidemic is confined to about 10,000 people.
Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, has had trouble running even so much as a pilot program for 15,000 of an estimated 3.5 million infected people. Many of the country's 25 treatment centers, which were selling the drugs at a subsidized price of $85 a year, ran dry in September and did not get new supplies until February.
Malaysia is the only country to exercise a "compulsory license" right under trade treaties to ignore a patent and import generics, said James P. Love, director of the Consumer Project on Technology, a group that is pushing for cheaper drugs. Uganda, Mozambique and Zambia may soon do the same, he said, but China backed away from doing so for fear of American trade retaliation. "They're using older drugs that are already off patent in China," he said.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company |
|
Re: STRAIGHT AIDS MYTH SHATTERED - NY POST |
by Aletta
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 4
28 Mar 2004
|
Every epidemic disease is now renamed 'AIDS' under the Bangui Definition.
Mortalities (non natural) in S.A. remain at the same 2.2% P.A. that they were BEFORE AIDS. Either every other disease in the region vanished overnight or 'AIDS' is simply the old diseases with a new name. You decide.
-------------
In Africa, the continent supposedly being decimated by
HIV, HIV tests are rarely ever done, so there the idea
that all patients with AIDS are infected with HIV is
based entirely on supposition.
At a WHO conference in the Central African Republic in 1985, U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) introduced the "Bangui Definition" of AIDS in Africa.
The CDC officials later explained, "The definition was reached by consensus, based mostly on the delegates' experience in treating AIDS patients. It has proven a useful tool in determining the
extent of the AIDS epidemic in Africa, especially in areas where no testing is available.
It's major components were prolonged fevers (for a month or more), weight loss of 10% or greater, and prolonged diarrhea..."(McCormick, 1996). Where AIDS is diagnosed clinically, large numbers of AIDS patients test negative for HIV. As no HIV testing is required in Africa we have no idea how many AIDS cases there are HIV positive (De ####, 1991; Gilks, 1991; Widy-Wirski, 1988).
_______
Other conditions common in underprivileged and
impoverished communities that are known to cause false
positive results are tuberculosis, malaria, hepatitis and leprosy (Burke, 1993; Challakeree, 1993; Johnson, 1998; Kashala, 1994; MacKenzie,1992; Meyer, 1987). In fact, these are the primary health threats in Africa; several million cases of tuberculosis and malaria are reported in Africa each year - more than all the AIDS cases reported in Africa since 1982 (WHO, 1998)*. |
|
AIDS Apologists VS AIDS Dissidents - The Truth About AIDS Denialists |
by AIDS TRUTHS
anitdissident (nospam) dodgeit.com (unverified) |
Current rating: -2
05 Apr 2004
|
AIDS
apologists are those who know HIV leads to AIDS (proven by science, so much
scientific proof) and we are defending the scientifically known fact that viral
pathogenesis and progression of 'HIV to AIDS' causes the eventual need for
combination therapies to prolong life. Mixed "AIDS Apologist" links
here or find
comments here
from both sides (dissidents and the scientific community), but still about AIDS
Apologist activities...
AIDS dissidents (better known as AIDS Denialists
who are AIDS
dissidence, dissidence is anti-establishment like, against science and
progression, argumentative) deny HIV causes AIDS and claim the medications kill
the patients (AZT "over use" alone started this myth in the late 80s, but
medicine combo/therapies are working today in the year 2000+). Basically a group
of non doctors and non scientists who challenge the conventional HIV/AIDS model
or hypothesis and do not accept the proven evidence. These dissident groups seem
almost fanatical by them posting the same
message multiple times to a targeted list of internet websites (non
dissident sites of course, clogging up the normal flow of reading material with
intentions of shutting the
sites down) and insulting/bashing anyone who may not agree.
What are AIDS dissidents? Find out who, what, where, when and why:
http://www.hivforum.com/?dissident=dissident+site:aegis.com
What are AIDS denialists all about? See the myths exposed:
http://www.hivforum.com/?dissident=dissident+site:thebody.com
Learn about how they are murdering HIV positive people:
http://www.medchecker.com/dissident/aids-dissidents.htm
Thanks.
http://www.HIVforum.com |
|
Re: STRAIGHT AIDS MYTH SHATTERED - NY POST |
by Aletta
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 3
10 Apr 2004
|
Raving about dissidents having 'failed sex change operations' and other paranoid delusions.
Get some help |
|
Re: STRAIGHT AIDS MYTH SHATTERED - NY POST |
by tbby
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
15 Jun 2004
|
YOU ARE A BUNCH OF FREAKS AT THAT SITE PAUL KING!
Please visit pozfriends.net (forums, chat, dating, guestbook, member photos, anti dissident action group, etc) to learn the truths (AIDS EXISTS). |
|
Nothing makes sense |
by David
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
30 Dec 2004
|
Cumulative 'AIDS' figures in Canada
What is interesting is that there have only been 65 teenage cases since 1983 in Canada. Also the 20 to 25 age group is very low too.
This is similar to the U.S. and does not fit an std.
Like America, people over 60 have as much 'AIDS'
(611 cases) as both teenagers AND 20-24 years olds combined (65 teen cases and 573 cases in the 20-24 group).
Seems once again Grannies are going wild!
http://www.avert.org/canstatr.htm |
|
