Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCIENCE HERO: DR. ALEXANDER LANGMUIR (why is MICHAEL FUMENTO celebrating this eugenisist scumbag?)
My Hero ^ | Michael Fumento

Posted on 07/31/2008 11:10:30 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

It's part of American folk lore: The man who saves the day and rides off into the sunset without anybody knowing his name. Sometimes he doesn't even leave a silver bullet.

Dr. Alexander Langmuir, the father of infectious disease epidemiology, was such a man.

"He had an absolutely profound impact on saving lives," said Alan Summer, Dean of the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health and a former student of Langmuir's. "If one wants to include important roles he played, the people he trained and what they've gone on to do, a figure in the millions (of lives saved) would certainly be true."

Epidemiology is the science of trying to connect disease or injury with a cause. By doing so, it is often possible to eliminate that cause.

In 1949, Langmuir created the epidemiology section at what is now known as the Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta. He had been called upon to combat a perceived epidemic of malaria but discovered that there wasn't one.

"These guys (state health officials) were reporting every fever coming in as malaria, so he set about to establish reporting of cases and to verify that these were cases," said Dr. David Henderson, deputy of the assistant secretary of health at the Department of Health and Human Services. Henderson was also a Langmuir student. "Indeed, what he found was almost no malaria at that time, which was a great blow to those running this malaria eradication program."

But Langmuir took advantage of the situation by using the money to set up an organization to fight real epidemics. This became the Epidemic Intelligence Service.

"Langmuir had a broader idea of what this should be," said Henderson. It should be "a backup to the states, a resource that should be drawn on from whatever problems would emerge."

"By creating this concept of surveillance and disease reporting, of having a whole group of physicians on call as we were 24 hours a day, and if there was an epidemic you would drop everything to go immediately and help states," he added.

After the Korean War broke out in 1950, Langmuir again sensed opportunity and tapped into the supply of medical personnel being recalled to duty. He kept them stateside, teaching them the principles of what would later be called shoe-leather epidemiology.

This comprised accurate, comprehensive surveillance combined with sending doctors out into the field to interview victims, their families, local officials, and anyone who could provide information concerning local outbreaks.

The rolls of the EIS now read like a Who's Who of the medical profession, including surgeon generals, CDC heads, the last head of the Public Health Service, the current director of the World Health Organization's AIDS program, and many deans of the country's 20 schools of public health.

"Almost like a professor in a university," said Henderson, "he worked with each of the EIS officers, challenging them, ensuring the integrity of their studies, querying them. All of these things resulted in a great many people ending up in public health who would never have done so."

One example is Henderson himself, who headed up the world's most successful attempt to control a disease – the World Health Organization's program to eradicate smallpox.

Prior to the campaign, the disease was killing two and a half million people a year, and disfigured many more. Henderson says the real credit for the eradication should go to Langmuir.

"He emphasized surveillance with regard to disease wherever it occurred, analyzing it and looking at it, and acting if appropriate," Henderson said. "That's what we did with smallpox eradication. It was basically Langmuirian principles."

He says those same principles are now being applied in the attempt to eliminate other dread diseases, including the polio eradication effort that has so far succeeded in wiping out the disease in Western countries.

"In my own area, I discovered that mild Vitamin A deficiency is probably responsible for one to three million children dying or going blind each year," Summers said. "It is now the big international activity that UNICEF and other organizations have identified as a critical issue and have resolved to control by the year 2000."

The emergency investigative service Langmuir established at the CDC also continues to fly to disease outbreaks at a moment's notice.

When attendees at an American Legion conference suddenly began dying, it was the CDC that found the cause. Likewise, when young homosexual men in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco began succumbing to a strange new illness, it was the CDC that interviewed thousands and discovered the means of transmitting what would become known as AIDS.

While Langmuir set up the apparatus to deal with real epidemics, he also exposed those that have been exaggerated.

After the introduction of the Salk polio vaccine in the mid-1950s, reports of persons developing the disease from the inoculation sent the nation into a panic and threatened the program.

Langmuir had the CDC investigate each case and found that primarily one company was involved.

"He predicted that there would eventually be 120 cases and there turned out to be 122," Henderson said. "The process was corrected and we went ahead with vaccinations."

In recent years, Langmuir became critical of the CDC's handling of AIDS. He believed that the organization was overstating both the overall numbers of infected individuals and especially the risk to non-drug-abusing heterosexuals of contracting the disease.

Langmuir was also quite critical of what has been described as America's "risk of the week" syndrome. Commenting on the cellular phone brain tumor scare earlier this year, he told Investor's Business Daily, "It's perfectly god awful. It's totally irrational."

Langmuir was the CDC's chief epidemiologist from 1949 to 1970. He spent the rest of his life teaching at Harvard Medical School and at Johns Hopkins, from which he had earned his degree in public health.

"As a teacher he was incredible. He could really capture an audience in ways that was difficult to describe," said Dr. Jonathan Freeman, a professor of epidemiology who taught with Langmuir at Harvard. Earlier this year, Langmuir received an award from his students at Johns Hopkins for being an outstanding instructor.

"You could always see in this man tremendous vision," said Henderson. "When you look back, you see this is one of those people who has very profoundly affected an entire field and a generation through sheer personality, and his ability to teach and inspire."

Written by Michael Fumento Photos courtesy of The Alan Mason Chesney Medical Archives of The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: aids; alexanderlangmuir; democrats; duesberg; govwatch; homosexualagenda; margaretsanger; michaelfumento; nobama08; obama; obamatruthfile; plannedparenthood; prolife
What Michael Fumento leaves out of his hero worship is that Alexander Langmuir was a devotee of Margaret Sanger and her population control, abortion, and sterilization agenda.. Indeed, in a letter addressed to fellow Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) alumni, Reimert T. Ravenholt, Alexander Langmuir was positively gushing about Margaret Sanger:

"I got into the family planning deal a bit earlier than you. It was April 1929 at the Harvard Liberal Club when I was a sophomore. Margaret Sanger came and spoke and wowed the whole crowd. I became an immediate convert. Then at medical school her son Grant Sanger was a classmate and I go to know Margaret personally. Quite a gal!" (link)

Just as telling was Ravenholt's reply:

"I have known since the 1960s, when you were torn whether to accept the Population Council invitation, that we shared a deep interest in world population problems, but I did not, until receiving your letter, know how it began with Margaret Sanger's speech at the Harvard Liberal Club in 1929. 1 wish I had been there!

Although you did not devote yourself full-time to family planning, as I did during my years with A.I.D., you nevertheless, through EIS offspring and technical contributions, as with AID's Research Committee, contributed in large measure to the strength of the preventive population programs that were implemented. To my way of thinking, epidemiology is the creme de la creme of population sciences." (link)

The truth is, the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) is teeming with eugenicists and population control fanatics, thanks to Michael Fumento's hero, Alexander Langmuir. Most people have never heard of the EIS. It was and remains a semi-secret, elite unit of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). In addition to being a hotbed for eugenicist and population control fanatics, the EIS (otherwise known as the "medical CIA") has a very sordid history that has been carefully kept from the public by its willing accomplices in the media (many of them EIS alumni themselves). It's time the EIS got the attention it deserves. But with people like Michael Fumento, supposedly one of our own, running around heaping unqualified praise on the likes of Langmuir and the EIS, don't expect it to happen anytime soon--GGG

1 posted on 07/31/2008 11:10:31 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stentor; Marty; Fractal Trader; DaveLoneRanger; metmom; Alamo-Girl; betty boop; John Valentine; ...

If you would like to be added to the RETHINKING AIDS PING LIST drop me a FReepmail.

AIDS is the biggest public health scam in medical history. Like global warming, AIDS is being used to push a powerful leftist political agenda. For over two decades the Public Health Establishment has used your tax dollars and the full power of the federal government to wage a massive propaganda (and intimidation) campaign designed to (A) dupe the American public into believing that HIV is the cause of AIDS (B) scare the public into thinking "we are all at risk" (C) coverup the extreme toxicity of AIDS chemotherapy drugs (which are not just used on "fast-track" gays and junkies, but also given to pregnant mothers, infants, and children) (D) use this fear to push a leftist social agenda that includes socialized medicine, and the promotion of homosexuality and explicit sex "education" to tender-aged school children (E) use their "public health mandate" to bypass the authority of parents and local school boards who object to their social engineering schemes (F) create a massive federal bureaucracy encouraging the use of addictive drugs, to include prescription heroine (G) use threats and intimidation to silence dissenting scientists and to keep the press from covering the debate (H) and finally, to use AIDS as a model to push similar social agendas with respect to future epidemics.

Every single point above can be documented on my profile page.


2 posted on 07/31/2008 11:11:14 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
(why is MICHAEL FUMENTO celebrating this eugenisist scumbag?)

Because despite his belief/support in eugenics, he actually contributed in a huge way to Medical Science, and doctors worldwide use his contribution daily to fight disease, illness, and death. Life is filled with dichotomy.

3 posted on 07/31/2008 11:17:32 AM PDT by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
==Because despite his belief/support in eugenics, he actually contributed in a huge way to Medical Science

I beg to differ. Did you read the last link in reply #1? If anything, he contributed to the corruption of medical science, and surreptitiously used his position at EIS to push his totalitarian population control agenda, both here and abroad.

4 posted on 07/31/2008 11:25:30 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

INTREP


5 posted on 07/31/2008 12:09:28 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

He is credited with saving hundreds of thousands of lives but that means nothing to the conspiracy crowd.


6 posted on 07/31/2008 12:14:30 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

INTREP = Intel. Report?


7 posted on 07/31/2008 12:53:53 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
He is credited with saving hundreds of thousands of lives but that means nothing to the conspiracy crowd.

By Langmuir's own admission, he was a rabid, Margaret-Sanger-loving Eugenicist. That puts him in the same category as Clinton's Surgeon General, Jocelyn Elders. He used his position and your tax dollars to push for abortion, sterilization, and other eugenicist causes. He managed to stay out of the limelight because he was head of the EIS. I suggest you read reply #1, especially the last link (”sordid history”) contained therein. If, after reading all that, you still don't think the EIS deserves to have the spotlight shined on it, then I will be inclined to seriously doubt your conservative credentials, newbie.

8 posted on 07/31/2008 1:20:58 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Please see my profile :-)


9 posted on 07/31/2008 1:22:17 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

That’s what I thought. Thanks!

All the best—GGG


10 posted on 07/31/2008 1:23:43 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; theDentist; LiteKeeper

For more on the CDC/EIS duplicitous/eugenicist/population control/pro-abortion/Margaret-Sanger-loving agenda, you might want to give the following a read:

The Hidden Agenda behind HIV

Rethinking AIDS, Jan./Feb. 1994

Despite all assurances to the contrary, the AIDS establishment continues to fund only research on HIV. Peter Duesberg inadvertently proved this blackout on all alternative research when he recently submitted a grant proposal to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The Institute’s clinical director of AIDS research had personally invited the proposal, which outlined a plan to test the long-term effects of nitrite inhalants, or “poppers,” on the immune systems of mice. The answer came back in December: The anonymous referees had not only turned it down, but had refused even to review the proposal.

Why does such a political correctness continue to dominate the War on AIDS? After all, public health officials cannot yet demonstrate they have saved any lives from the syndrome, while its death toll rises steadily. The scientific predictions have also failed miserably. In contrast to the predicted spread of AIDS in the United States, the epidemic has remained strictly confined to risk groups; nine of every ten AIDS cases have been male, and ninety percent of all AIDS victims have been linked to heavy drug use, whether intravenously or as “fast track” homosexuals. Indeed, epidemiologists have yet to establish that any epidemic at all has struck among blood transfusion recipients. Even individual AIDS diseases prefer specific risk groups, such as Kaposi’s sarcoma among homosexuals and the near-absence of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia among Africans, whose lungs all contain the microbe. And some thirty-nine percent of AIDS diseases in America have nothing at all to do with immune deficiency — witness Kaposi’s sarcoma, various lymphomas, wasting disease, and dementia, for example. In short, AIDS is not an infectious disease.

The obsession with an “AIDS virus” has little to do with science or medicine. Writing in Nature in 1991 (June 21), British HIV researcher Robin Weiss and American CDC official Harold Jaffe hinted at the real purpose in an attack on Peter Duesberg: “But if he and his supporters belittle ‘safe sex,’ would have us abandon HIV screening of blood donations, and curtail research into anti-HIV drugs and vaccines, then their message is perilous.” To whom? If AIDS is not infectious, such recommendations would simply save the taxpayer money and anxiety.

But perhaps this is the point. A 1989 report by the National Research Council more explicitly revealed the hidden agenda. Originally sponsored by the Rockefeller and Russel Sage Foundations and then funded by the Public Health Service, AIDS: Sexual Behavior and Intravenous Drug Use laid out a plan for social engineering on a massive scale — using AIDS as the excuse. “The devastating effect of an epidemic on a community can evoke strong political and social responses,” the committee duly noted. “An epidemic necessitates the rapid mobilization of the community to counter the spread of illness and death” (p. 373). The power of such a method to force changes in cultural values is based on careful manipulation of fear. “Ideally, health promotion messages should heighten an individual’s perceptions of threat and his or her capacity to respond to that threat, thus modulating the level of fear.… What is not yet known is how to introduce fear in the right way in a particular message intended for a particular audience. Acquiring that knowledge will require planned variations of AIDS education programs that are carefully executed and then carefully evaluated,” stated the committee coolly (pp. 267-8).

The report then identified one of the major targets of change — Judaeo-Christian moral values. “Historically, there has been a strong social reluctance in the United States to speak or write about sexuality in explicit terms. Despite recent indications of greatly increased tolerance for sexual explicitness in the media and literature, that reluctance remains strong in much of the population; it is particularly strong in instances that involve the education of children and adolescents” (p. 379). The fear of a supposedly infectious AIDS epidemic, however, could be used to fix such problems. As the report declared, “The committee believes that, during an epidemic, politeness is a social virtue that must take second place to the protection of life” (p. 379).

Other public health officials have been even more forthright. As an officer of the Centers for Disease Control, Donald Francis had in 1984 drafted the CDC’s proposed AIDS strategy. In his 1992 retirement speech at the agency’s Atlanta, Georgia headquarters, Francis voiced the ambitions held by many of his fellow officers in describing “the opportunity that the HIV epidemic provides for public health” (JAMA, 9-16-92). He stated in no uncertain terms the radical nature of the plan:

The cloistered caution of the past needs to be discarded. The climate and culture must be open ones where old ideas are challenged. Those who desire the status quo should seek employment elsewhere. The American HIV prevention program should be the place where the best and the brightest come, where the action is, where history is being made. This is the epidemic of the century, and every qualified person should want to have a piece of the action. The “action” described by Francis was a set of programs that would, as he fully recognized, need strong political protection from angry taxpayers and voters. For example, he bitterly attacked public opposition to condom distribution programs, and called for powerful legal measures to bypass parental discretion. “The ongoing controversies involving abstincence and condoms typify the morass into which schools can fall,” Francis complained. “If, in the opinion of those far more expert than I, schools cannot be expected to provide such programs, then health departments should take over, using as a justification their mandate to protect the public’s health.”

Francis also included proposals for dealing with the AIDS risk of intravenous drug use — including a call for “prescription of addicting drugs” with Federal government sponsorship. Even libertarians who advocate legalizing drugs would balk at such notions, which would ultimately create a massive bureaucracy encouraging drug use. “Following a more enlightened model for drug treatment, including prescribing heroin, would have dramatic effects on HIV and could eliminate many of the dangerous illegal activites surrounding drugs,” he insisted, knowing that only fear of the AIDS epidemic might make such proposals tolerable to the public. Ignoring the toxic, and possibly AIDS-inducing, effects of drugs, Francis emphasized that “In addition to treatment, safe injection [!] must be stressed both for those in treatment programs and those out of treatment. The provision of sterile injection equipment for drug users should be the standard of public health practice in the United States.”

Most chillingly of all, Francis saw the possibilities in harnessing other epidemics to advance similar agendas. As he put it, “if we establish new mechanisms to handle the HIV epidemic, [these] can serve as models for other diseases.”

The common denominator of these and similar plans is that they originate with the Federal government’s Public Health Service, and especially from its frontline public health agency, the Centers for Disease Control. Public perceptions often paint the CDC as a minor office that gathers and publishes dull statistics on disease. The truth is shockingly different. A sophisticated $2 billion-per-year operation, the CDC employs a staff of thousands who see themselves as having an activist mandate. They view epidemics as opportunities for control and for imposing lifestyle changes on the population.

The CDC has traditionally specialized in contagious disease. Its initials, in fact, originally stood for the Communicable Disease Center, from its formation in 1946 until its name changed in 1970. And therein lies its bias, for it tends to interpret almost any epidemic as being infectious. Certainly the CDC has plenty of raw material with which to work; each year brings at least one thousand outbreaks, or “clusters,” of disease that strike in the United States — one every eight hours. These can range from flus and pneumonias to closely-occurring cancers, but most outbreaks involve no more than a handful of people each; since the polio epidemic, none have posed serious threats to the general public. However, by falsely labelling any arbitrarily chosen outbreak as infectious and blaming it on a virus or other microbe, the CDC can quickly generate public fear and political mobilization behind almost any agenda.

The CDC has actually engineered a number of false alarms or misdirected campaigns over the past four decades, neutralizing scientific dissent and calmer voices when necessary. AIDS, though not the first example, has now become the most successful epidemic by far. Two powerful weapons in the agency’s arsenal, both unknown to the public at large, have made this possible: a semi-secret wing of the CDC known as the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS), and a quiet “partnership” program with private organizations.

The Epidemic Intelligence Service

Among epidemiologists, it is often half-jokingly referred to as the “medical CIA.” Founded in 1951 by public health professor Alexander Langmuir, the EIS was first designed to act as an elite biological-warfare countermeasures unit of the CDC. Langmuir was hired because he also served as one of the select advisors to the Defense Department’s chemical and biological warfare program.

The first EIS class of 21 recent medical or biological graduates underwent several weeks of intense training at the CDC’s Atlanta headquarters, before being dispatched on their two-year assignments on loan to various state or local health departments around the country. They acted as the eyes and ears of the CDC, carefully monitoring for any possible outbreak of war-induced disease. While on their tours of duty, each EIS officer could be sent elsewhere in the country on a 24 hour-a-day basis. In case of war, the EIS would operate under any emergency powers granted the CDC — potentially including quarantines, mass immunizations, or other drastic measures.

In an article written for the American Journal of Public Health (March, 1952), Langmuir made clear that membership in the EIS did not end with the two year assignment, but was permanent. He wrote that, “As a result of their experience, many of these officers may well remain in full-time epidemiology or other public health pursuits at federal, state, or local levels. Some, no doubt, will return to civilian, academic, or clinical practice, but in the event of war they could be returned to active duty with the Public Health Service and assigned to strategic areas to fulfil the functions for which they were trained.”

Every year since 1951 has seen a new crop of EIS recruits, some classes over one hundred members in size. The nearly 2,000 alumni have gone on to high positions in society, though rarely advertising their affiliation. Indeed, the CDC has now made the EIS more secretive than ever, having suppressed the public availability of the membership directory since last year. Members can be found in the Surgeon General’s office and elsewhere in the Federal government, as well as in the World Health Organization, state and local health departments, universities, pharmaceutical companies, tax-exempt foundations, hospitals, and even as staff writers, editors, or news anchormen for major newspapers, scientific journals, and television news departments. In these positions, EIS alumni act not only as the CDC’s surveillance arm and emergency reserve, but also as seemingly “independent” advocates for CDC policies.

In time, the fear of artificial disease epidemics faded. But Langmuir and other top CDC officials had always held bigger plans for the EIS. Langmuir, for example, an apostle of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, involved the EIS in the population control movement by the 1960s. The CDC has gained most, however, from EIS activities in natural disease epidemics, to which its “disease detectives” have turned their attention.

The flu, being truly an infectious disease, often proved itself most valuable to the CDC. Although the winter following the end of World War I was the last time a flu epidemic caused widespread death, the CDC has pushed annual flu vaccinations up to the present day. At times, the agency has even rung the alarm over an impending flu crisis, hoping to use memories of the 1918 epidemic to gain emergency powers and impose mass vaccinations. By using such tactics in 1957 over the Asian flu, the CDC managed to wrangle extra money out of Congress to expand the EIS and crash-produce a vaccine. But the flu season was already winding down by the time the vaccine was ready, and the flu itself turned out to have been as mild as in any other year.

By 1976, CDC director David Sencer wanted to try again, though on a grander scale. After one soldier in Pennsylvania died of a flu-related pneumonia in January, Sencer predicted that a pig-borne human virus, nicknamed the “swine flu,” would soon devastate the United States. Panicked with visions of impending doom, Congress moved to authorize the CDC’s immunization plan for every man, woman, and child in the country. Unexpectedly, the legislation suddenly stalled when the insurance companies underwriting the vaccine discovered that it had seriously toxic side effects.

Sencer had to do something fast. He immediately set up a “War Room” in Auditorium A at the CDC headquarters, and put the EIS network on full alert to search for any disease outbreak that might resemble the flu. Within weeks, the War Room received word of a pneumonia cluster among men just returning home from the Philadelphia convention of the American Legion. Several Philadelphia-based EIS officers and alumni had detected the outbreak, and acted as a fifth column that not only helped arranged an invitation for the CDC to come in, but also took their orders from the arriving team of CDC and EIS officers. Even the New York Times staff writer sent to cover the story, Lawrence Altman, was himself an EIS alumnus.

The CDC team allowed media rumors to circulate that this Legionnaires’ disease was the beginning of the swine flu. Within days, Congress decided to pass the vaccine bill. Only later did the CDC admit that the legionnaires had not been infected by the flu virus, too late to stop the immunization program. Some 50 million Americans received the vaccine, leading to more than a thousand cases of nerve damage and paralysis, dozens of deaths, and lawsuits awarding almost $100 million in damages. In the ultimate irony, no swine flu epidemic ever materialized; the only destruction left behind by the phantom swine flu resulted from the CDC’s vaccine.

The agency later blamed Legionnaires’ disease on a common soil bacterium, one that clearly fails Koch’s postulates for causing the disease and is therefore actually harmless. The legionnaires’ deaths are not so hard to understand, since the pneumonias struck elderly men, many of whom had undergone kidney transplant operations, and who had become particularly drunk during the Bicentennial celebration — the classic risks for pneumonia. Thus “Legionnaires’ disease” is not an infectious condition, but merely a new name for old pneumonias.

Using its EIS network, the CDC has applied similar tactics to other outbreaks of disease. During the 1960s, for example, the EIS helped fuel the National Institute of Health’s growing Virus-Cancer Program by tracking down every small cluster of leukemia cases, trying to create the impression that some virus was responsible for the cancer. Robert Gallo became one of many scientists so impressed with the CDC investigations that he devoted the rest of his career to finding a human leukemia virus.

More recently, the CDC managed to have a team of EIS officers invited into New Mexico to investigate a cluster of pneumonia cases among Navajo Indians. By June of 1993, the CDC began insisting that the brief and relatively small outbreak was caused by a rat fecal virus, the Hantavirus. But as a letter in the January 1 issue of the Lancet pointed out, most of the affected Navajos actually tested negative for the virus. And unlike a contagious disease, this pneumonia never spread beyond the first few dozen victims. Again, the CDC’s “disease detectives” used a high-profile investigation to create media publicity and frighten the general population, rather than troubling themselves with the scientific method and its more boring answers.

Of all the epidemics mismanaged by the CDC, AIDS proved the most spectacular in achieving political success. By 1981, the EIS had so thoroughly penetrated the medical and public health institutions in the United States that it could now detect even the smallest and most loosely-connected “clusters” of diseases, no matter how far apart the victims were in time and space. The original AIDS cases were all found in homosexual men in the “fast track” lifestyle — those having hundreds or thousands of sexual contacts and using enormous amounts of hard drugs to make such promiscuous activity possible. For the CDC, the trick was to make the illness seem contagious; a simple drug-induced epidemic among homosexuals would hardly have frightened the public, nor have allowed the CDC to accomplish its radical public health agenda.

The epidemic officially began in 1980 after Michael Gottlieb, a new immunologist at the UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, decided to test the brand new T cell-counting technology. He put out an informal request to fellow physicians to refer cases of immune deficiency to him. Over the next several months, colleagues sent him four such cases, all male homosexuals with Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia. Sensing that the CDC might take an interest, Gottlieb called active EIS officer Wayne Shandera in the Los Angeles health department. Shandera had heard an isolated report of a fifth homosexual with the same problem, and compiled a report for the CDC.

Ordinarily, each of the five cases would have been seen by separate doctors, leaving nothing to suggest the word “epidemic” to anyone. But having a pre-positioned EIS agent like Shandera certainly helped the CDC gather such cases together as a potential cluster. Shandera’s report fell on the desk of James Curran, an official in the CDC’s venereal diseases division; the 1987 book And the Band Played On records that Curran wrote “Hot stuff. Hot stuff.” on the report (p. 67). He had the agency publish it immediately.

By the time the report appeared on June 5, 1981, Curran was already organizing a special Kaposi’s Sarcoma and Opportunistic Infections (KSOI) task force to lead an investigation of the five-victim epidemic. EIS members Harold Jaffe and Mary Guinan, also from the venereal diseases division, helped run the task force. The first order of business was to find as many similar patients as possible, thereby causing the epidemic to “grow.” Next was to explain the syndrome; to the CDC, this meant trying to find an infectious agent. This would be no simple task, since essentially all of the first fifty cases admitted to heavy use of poppers, a drug preferred by homosexuals as a means of facilitating anal intercourse. Even if this toxic drug presented itself as the obvious explanation, the CDC investigators had no intention of letting the evidence interfere. Accordinng to historian Elizabeth Etheridge, “While many of the patients were routine users of amyl nitrites or ‘poppers,’ no one in the KSOI task force believed the disease was a toxicological problem” (Sentinel for Health, 1992, p. 326).

So the EIS was activated to prove AIDS infectious. EIS officer David Auerbach and others confirmed that these extremely promiscuous homosexuals were often linked to one another through long chains of sexual encounters. To prove that AIDS was “spreading” to other people, other officers scoured hospitals to find heroin addicts with opportunistic infections, and blamed their needle-sharing rather than the heroin use, itself a classic risk factor for pneumonias and other illnesses. Bruce Evatt and Dale Lawrence, both members of the EIS, discovered one hemophiliac in Colorado with an opportunistic pneumonia as a side effect of internal bleeding, but rediagnosed the patient as an AIDS case. Even Haitians in Florida and Haiti were interviewed by EIS officer Harry Haverkos, who renamed their endemic tuberculosis as AIDS.

Not understanding the loaded nature of such investigations, the outside world completely bought the CDC line. Soon the race was on for scientific researchers to find the guilty virus. But this search, too, had been rigged. Donald Francis, an EIS member himself since 1971, decided just eleven days after the original Shandera report that the syndrome should be blamed on a retrovirus — with a latent period, no less. Using his various contacts in the retrovirus field, Francis spent the next two years pushing Robert Gallo to isolate a new retrovirus. Eventually Gallo did take an interest, and claimed credit for finding HIV.

With his April 23, 1984, press conference, Gallo completed the crusade begun by the CDC and its EIS. As the cameras rolled and the cameras flashed, Gallo and Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler launched the nation into a War on AIDS. Few people knew the true story behind that announcement, or of the political agenda that Don Francis and others were preparing to foist on the American people.

The Partnership Program

The CDC’s second major weapon for mobilizing public support lay in its assistance programs for private organizations. By funding or otherwise supporting groups not affiliated with the CDC, the agency could create apparently spontaneous mass movements. Spokesmen claiming to represent various communities could all simultaneously advocate policies identical to those of the CDC, while allowing the agency to remain quietly in the background and avoid direct criticism.

In 1984, the CDC began forming “partnerships,” based on “cooperative agreements,” with large numbers of “community-based organizations,” for the purpose of AIDS “education” [read: indoctrination]. At first the funding was channeled through the United States Conference of Mayors, which dispersed the money to a growing network of AIDS activist groups. By 1985, the CDC was giving over $1 million to state governments, influencing their response to AIDS.

After 1986, the money began flowing freely, and the CDC’s corresponding influence expanded quickly. The American Red Cross alone received over $19 million from 1988 to 1991, cementing CDC control among medical institutions. Millions more were targeted to such groups as the American Medical Association, the National Association of People with AIDS (which operates as a coordinating center for much of the AIDS activist and gay rights movements), Americans for a Sound AIDS Policy (which generates CDC-approved materials for evangelical Christians), the National Education Association (the major teachers’ union), the National PTA, the National Association of Broadcasters (which represents most television and radio stations and their networks), the National Conference of State Legislatures, and dozens of others. Even such groups as the National Urban League, the National Council of La Raza, and the Center for Population Options receive CDC grants and other technical aid. Many specifically AIDS-related groups actually depend on CDC money for their very existence.

Naturally, the CDC has established mechanisms for ensuring that its money and other aid are used for the intended purposes. Organizations wishing to receive grants must not only file applications, but are pre-screened by having to send representatives to CDC workshops on how to apply. These meetings allow the CDC to meet and judge applicants directly. Furthermore, any organization receiving aid winds up having CDC supervision of its AIDS-related “educational” activities.

It is little wonder there is so much political pressure, from all sides, to defend both the virus-AIDS hypothesis and the CDC’s public health agenda.

As with so many non-contagious diseases in the past, the CDC has persuaded the public that AIDS is infectious. Thus the taxpayer is manipulated with fear to acquiesce to the radical measures being pushed by the agency. Where “safe sex” programs, sterile needle exchanges, Federal subsidies of drug addiction, and other CDC proposals would normally be thrown out — along with the officials who proposed them — many Americans suspend judgment.

Most people do not yet realize that the entire campaign has been orchestrated mostly by a single agency of the Federal government, rather than being a spontaneous decision by independent experts and activists. As intended, the CDC has been able to mobilize the scientists, the medical institutions, political bodies, the news media, and a bewildering array of AIDS organizations behind its hidden agenda. All such groups will lose their credibility once the public discovers the real source of the campaign, and honest skepticism will spread faster than AIDS itself.

Signs of imminent change are appearing. The CDC’s public health measures — condoms, sterile needles, contact tracing, and the like — have failed to prevent the steady growth of AIDS. As this bad advice is recognized for what it is, more voices are joining the chorus of dissent against the HIV-AIDS hypothesis. The CDC may soon have to hold HIV research meetings all by itself.

That is, if Congress doesn’t abolish the CDC first.


11 posted on 07/31/2008 1:43:07 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


12 posted on 07/31/2008 1:59:49 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
You seem not to be able to cut through the clutter to the heart of the matter. It's fight between those that think HIV causes AIDS and those that don't. There are scientists on both sides of the question. I read the “sordid history” link and other than proclaiming the CDC a power hungry monster(hardly something unheard of) the real statement being made is,’HIV doesn't cause AIDS’.
Then there are organizations on the opposite side, like Alert at www.alert.org (which are copyright protected) that you might read.
But we need not rely on scientists with agendas or power desires, we need only observe people who don't have AIDS acquiring AIDS after being infected with HIV. This happens from transfusing infected blood. Uninfected blood doesn't produce AIDS in the recipient. A few years back a gay dentist in Florida infected Kimberly Bergalis with HIV. She later died of AIDS as did the dentist. She was not in any risk group.
Those who claim HIV doesn't produce AIDS might well have their own agenda too, might’en they?
13 posted on 07/31/2008 3:09:32 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

They have a HUGE agenda, and it blinds them to reality.


14 posted on 07/31/2008 3:16:13 PM PDT by allmendream (If "the New Yorker" makes a joke, and liberals don't get it, is it still funny?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Cutting to the heart of the matter....You’re so right!


15 posted on 07/31/2008 3:42:10 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: allmendream; count-your-change

Speaking of HUGE agendas, Allmendream...if memory serves, I recall you saying that you are a scientist working for big pharma. Is that true?


16 posted on 07/31/2008 4:32:25 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I wondered how long it would take to use “BIG” something as a perjoritive. “Big” oil, pharma, Ag. , just attach “Big” to it and it becomes eeeeeevellll.
I’m alive today because of “Big” pharma so if Allmendream is a scientist with them, I say, “Thanks!”.


17 posted on 07/31/2008 5:12:31 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
==You seem not to be able to cut through the clutter to the heart of the matter. It's fight between those that think HIV causes AIDS and those that don't.

Wrong. There are several issues involved. Yes, there is a growing movement of scientists and medical doctors who challenge the HIV/AIDS hypothesis. But you left out the other (extremely important conservative) issues that are completely independent of the scientific debate over the real cause of AIDS.

Things you failed to mention:

A) The CDC/EIS have a history of exaggerating the scope of epidemics, thus scarring congress and the public into granting them more money and power.

B) The CDC/EIS has been a hotbed of “family planning” (read: eugenics) fanaticism.

C) The EIS (aka the “medical CIA”) has largely escaped public scrutiny because it was designed to operate below the radar of MSM.

D) Many prominent members of the media (this is especially pronounced amongst science/public health reporters) are themselves EIS alumni, who hold lifelong reserve status, who both plant and spike news stories on behalf of the EIS.

If you had bothered to read the articles I posted, you would know this—GGG

18 posted on 07/31/2008 5:13:09 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Since Allmendream wants to talk about “huge” agendas, I think it only fair he come clean about any potential conflicts of interest. And you are right, many life-saving products have come out of big pharma, but AIDS chemotherapy drugs aren’t one of them. The evidence is increasingly becoming clear—AZT/ART/HAART/”cocktail” AIDS chemotherapy drugs are killing men, women and children all over the world. Needless to say, Duesberg et al have been warning about this for the last two decades, and it’s only a matter of time before the AIDS establishment will be held accountable for maiming and killing hundreds of thousands to millions of people who trusted their doctors, who in turn were trusting the scientists, who were in turn were trusting the public health establishment (CDC/NIH/WHO) with respect to the cause of AIDS.


19 posted on 07/31/2008 5:27:18 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

ping to #19.


20 posted on 07/31/2008 5:45:15 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Government agencies are always using scare tactics to get money. You recall the “missile gap” that didn't exist and the horror of the Sputnik that opened the money gates to NASA, don't you?
If you find Alexander Langmuir distasteful, what do you think of NASA’s late and former Nazi SS officer?
AS for the CDC being a “hotbed of family planning” I won't go near that. But I did read the articles you referenced and I found them biased and out of date (1994).
21 posted on 07/31/2008 6:23:05 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Yes it is, and I am proud to be working on safe and effective medicine that save lives.


22 posted on 07/31/2008 6:25:13 PM PDT by allmendream (If "the New Yorker" makes a joke, and liberals don't get it, is it still funny?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
The truth does not go out of date. As for bias, if you can DOCUMENT any errors or inaccuracies, I'm all ears.
23 posted on 07/31/2008 6:26:20 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

==Yes it is, and I am proud to be working on safe and effective medicine that save lives.

You deserve to be proud of working on safe and effective medicine that save lives. But we are here talking specifically about AIDS chemotherapy drugs. Care to tell us what pharmaceutical corporation you work for? Has it produced/marketed any drugs designed to treat AIDS patients? Have you yourself ever worked on or helped develop any AIDS chemotherapy drugs? Just curious.


24 posted on 07/31/2008 6:35:25 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

This would be a great place to start if you find the time to get up to speed re: the political agenda driving AIDS. If you’re interested see my first post, especially the link entitled “sordid history.” And finally you might want to give “The Hidden Agenda Behind HIV” (reply #11) a read. I think you will find that the political agenda driving the phony “War on AIDS” is the biomedical equivalent of the globalist agenda driving the phony war on global warming. Finally, if you’re up for a few extra pings per week, I would love to add you to my infrequent “Rethinking AIDS” ping list.


25 posted on 07/31/2008 7:00:09 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Millions maimed and killed? I'm sure you have a source. But perhaps you're right. If the HIV isn't the cause of AIDS then giving drugs that suppress HIV should produce no benefits, no improvement over time.
Study after study has shown anti retroviral drugs DO improve and extend the live of AIDS sufferers. I can find them for you but they are readily available.
Allmendream doesn't need me to speak for him.
26 posted on 07/31/2008 7:04:44 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Nope, completely unrelated to virology in any way shape or form. But I am knowledgeable enough in the field to know that HIV causes AIDS or thousands of people are in on a conspiracy. Myself I just don't go in for conspiracy theories.
27 posted on 07/31/2008 8:30:21 PM PDT by allmendream (If "the New Yorker" makes a joke, and liberals don't get it, is it still funny?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

This what appeared in “sordid ..part 2”. One of the biggest publicity coups for the CDC’s war on AIDS was in the myth of the Florida woman who supposedly caught AIDS from her dentist. The story began in late 1986 with David Acer, a Florida dentist who discovered he was HIV-positive. He apparently frequented the homosexual bathhouse scene, including the poppers and other drugs so pervasive in that environment. Within another year, Acer had developed Kaposi’s sarcoma, his health slowly degenerating.

Meanwhile, Acer had pulled two teeth from college student Kimberly Bergalis, a business major. By 1989, more than a year later, Bergalis developed a mild yeast infection, a condition common to many women. A few months later she contracted a brief pneumonia, in the wake of emotional stress in studying for the state actuarial exam. Neither of these symptoms was serious or permanent, and both affect large numbers of people. But Bergalis was nevertheless tested for HIV, and turned out to be positive.

She denied any intravenous drug use or blood transfusions, and insisted she was a virgin. Because she seemed not to have caught HIV through any of the standard risks, her case attracted CDC attention within three months. The EIS network may have played a role, since several of its members worked in the Florida health department. Eager to find an excuse for imposing strict new regulations on the medical profession, the CDC sent in a team of investigators to find a plausible source of her infection. They soon came across David Acer, her dentist. Although Acer appeared to be conscientious and no route of HIV transmission could be found, the CDC investigators jumped to the conclusion that Bergalis must have caught the virus from the dentist. To reinforce this idea, a group of CDC researchers that included EIS members Harold Jaffe, Ruth Berkelman, and Carol Ciesielski compared the genetic sequences of HIV from dentist and patient, pronouncing them the same. The CDC experts even tested over a thousand of Acer’s clients, finding four others with HIV but no obvious risk factors.

The insurance company saw things differently, insisting that its own analysis showed that Bergalis received HIV from some other source. But the CDC ignored this evidence, rushing to publicize its own conclusions. The news leapt straight to the front pages and prime time television news broadcasts, terrifying the nation and swinging public opinion behind Congressional legislation to impose new CDC controls on medical workers. Ultimately the bill failed, though only after intense pressure from the medical profession.

In the meantime, an independent study out of Florida State University has concluded that Bergalis did not get HIV from her dentist after all. Other scientists have now pointed out that among Acer’s patients, five HIV positives add up to the same percentage as HIV positives in the general population — implying that these patients also caught the virus elsewhere. Where could Bergalis have contracted HIV? Apparently her mother has never been tested, opening the possibility that Kimberly may have carried the virus from birth — for twenty-three years — before she died.

Bergalis, moreover, did not die of HIV infection. She and her dentist suffered radically different diseases; he had Kaposi’s sarcoma, a cancer, while she first had a temporary yeast infection. Then Bergalis was prescribed the toxic and controversial AIDS drug AZT, a failed cancer chemotherapy that causes anemia, bone marrow loss, muscle wasting — and destruction of the immune system. Months of AZT treatment ravaged her body, leaving her open to opportunistic infections and forcing her into a wheelchair until her death.”
Myth? A noninfectous disease she caught from her mother 23 years before?
“This what appeared in “sordid ..part 2”. One of the biggest publicity coups for the CDC’s war on AIDS was in the myth of the Florida woman who supposedly caught AIDS from her dentist. The story began in late 1986 with David Acer, a Florida dentist who discovered he was HIV-positive. He apparently frequented the homosexual bathhouse scene, including the poppers and other drugs so pervasive in that environment. Within another year, Acer had developed Kaposi’s sarcoma, his health slowly degenerating.

Meanwhile, Acer had pulled two teeth from college student Kimberly Bergalis, a business major. By 1989, more than a year later, Bergalis developed a mild yeast infection, a condition common to many women. A few months later she contracted a brief pneumonia, in the wake of emotional stress in studying for the state actuarial exam. Neither of these symptoms was serious or permanent, and both affect large numbers of people. But Bergalis was nevertheless tested for HIV, and turned out to be positive.

She denied any intravenous drug use or blood transfusions, and insisted she was a virgin. Because she seemed not to have caught HIV through any of the standard risks, her case attracted CDC attention within three months. The EIS network may have played a role, since several of its members worked in the Florida health department. Eager to find an excuse for imposing strict new regulations on the medical profession, the CDC sent in a team of investigators to find a plausible source of her infection. They soon came across David Acer, her dentist. Although Acer appeared to be conscientious and no route of HIV transmission could be found, the CDC investigators jumped to the conclusion that Bergalis must have caught the virus from the dentist. To reinforce this idea, a group of CDC researchers that included EIS members Harold Jaffe, Ruth Berkelman, and Carol Ciesielski compared the genetic sequences of HIV from dentist and patient, pronouncing them the same. The CDC experts even tested over a thousand of Acer’s clients, finding four others with HIV but no obvious risk factors.

The insurance company saw things differently, insisting that its own analysis showed that Bergalis received HIV from some other source. But the CDC ignored this evidence, rushing to publicize its own conclusions. The news leapt straight to the front pages and prime time television news broadcasts, terrifying the nation and swinging public opinion behind Congressional legislation to impose new CDC controls on medical workers. Ultimately the bill failed, though only after intense pressure from the medical profession.

In the meantime, an independent study out of Florida State University has concluded that Bergalis did not get HIV from her dentist after all. Other scientists have now pointed out that among Acer’s patients, five HIV positives add up to the same percentage as HIV positives in the general population — implying that these patients also caught the virus elsewhere. Where could Bergalis have contracted HIV? Apparently her mother has never been tested, opening the possibility that Kimberly may have carried the virus from birth — for twenty-three years — before she died.

Bergalis, moreover, did not die of HIV infection. She and her dentist suffered radically different diseases; he had Kaposi’s sarcoma, a cancer, while she first had a temporary yeast infection. Then Bergalis was prescribed the toxic and controversial AIDS drug AZT, a failed cancer chemotherapy that causes anemia, bone marrow loss, muscle wasting — and destruction of the immune system. Months of AZT treatment ravaged her body, leaving her open to opportunistic infections and forcing her into a wheelchair until her death.”
Myth? A noninfectous disease she caught from her mother 23 years before?
1) Law: A case of intentional HIV injection? In a highly publicized case in Lafayette, Louisiana in 1998, a woman claimed that her ex-lover (a physician) deliberately injected her with HIV-tainted blood (HIV is the virus that causes AIDS). She did not know whose tainted blood it was nor did she realize she had been injected with blood until she became sick with viral infections months later. Records showed that the physician had indeed drawn blood from an HIV+ patient on the day she was injected. There were no records of her injection and no witnesses. So how could her story be tested?
Evolutionary trees provide the best scientific evidence in a case like this. HIV picks up mutations very fast ñ even within a single individual. If one person gives the virus to another, there are few differences between the virus in the donor and the virus in the recipient. As the virus goes from person to person, it keeps changing and gets more and more different over time. Thus, the HIV sequences in two individuals who got the virus from two different people will be very different. Thus, if the woman’s story were true, her virus should be very similar to the virus in the person whose blood was drawn but should be very different from viruses taken from other people in Lafayette. That was exactly what the evolutionary trees showed; her virus appeared to have come from the patient’s virus but was unlike the virus taken from other people in town. Since there was no way to explain how she would have gotten THAT patient’s virus on her own, the evolutionary analysis supported her story. (Incidentally, this case was the first use of phylogenetics in U.S. criminal court.)

2) Did a Florida dentist with AIDS transmit the virus to his patients?
Kimberly Bergalis made national headlines and testified in congressional hearings as a heterosexual young woman who got AIDS. The only known potential source of her virus was her dentist, and over half a dozen of his other patients also had the disease. In this case, the initial evidence implicating the dentist was merely the statistical association of several people with AIDS whose only known exposure was the dentist. Again, evolutionary trees were created to see if the patients’ viruses appeared to have descended from the dentist virus. The dentist virus did appear to be closely related to many of the patient viruses, as if it was the source. However, two patients appeared to have gotten their virus elsewhere, and those two patients were the only two infected patients with other risk factors. So again, the evolutionary analysis provided a critical means of understanding HIV transmission. (see next box)
3) Other cases. Evolutionary trees have been used in many other cases of infectious disease transmission. They were used to identify deer mice as the source of hantavirus infections in the Four-Corners area in the early 1990s. They are routinely used to determine the source of rabies viruses in human cases, and they led to the discovery of a case in which rabies virus took at least 7 years to kill a person (a length of time far in excess of anything known previously). And trees have been used to determine whether recent cases of polio in North America were relict strains from the New World, were vaccine strains, or were introduced from Asia.
(From http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/pap.apld.html, Applied Evolution: Technology for the 21st Century, James Bull, PhD, University of Texas at Austin, For the Symposium Presented, by the Society for the Study of Evolution, “Building the Web of Life: Evolution in Action” NABT Ft. Worth, 10/99)
Hillis, D. M., and J. P. Huelsenbeck. 1994. Support for dental HIV transmission. Nature 369:24-25.
SIR — On the basis of a phylogenetic analysis of HIV sequences, Ou et al. concluded that a Florida dentist infected five of his eight known HIV-1 seropositive patients. These authors used bootstrap resampling to test the reliability of their finding and found that the HIV sequences from the dentist and infected patients formed a monophyletic group in 79% of the replicates in parsimony analysis. DeBry et al. in Scientific Correspondence questioned the conclusion of dental transmission, however, because a bootstrap analysis (based on threshold parsimony) of independently sequenced HIV variants clustered only one of the patient sequences with a dental sequence in the majority-rule consensus tree. DeBry et al. concluded that their analyses “...show that the available data are consistent with both the dental transmission hypothesis and the null hypothesis (the patients were independently infected from the local community) and do not distinguish between the two.” But both studies used an analysis of the bootstrap results that may not be the most appropriate method for this case. We have reanalysed the two datasets, as well as sequences from new patients and new local controls, and find strong support for trees consistent with HIV transmission between the dentist and six of ten of his seropositive patients.”
carrot.mcb.uconn.edu/mcb372/class2-02.htm


28 posted on 07/31/2008 8:32:39 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

No thanks. I don’t really have the time.


29 posted on 08/01/2008 5:46:37 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less! Sign the petition at http://www.americansolutions.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
==Nope, completely unrelated to virology in any way shape or form. But I am knowledgeable enough in the field to know that HIV causes AIDS or thousands of people are in on a conspiracy. Myself I just don't go in for conspiracy theories

You are the one who are bringing up conspiracy theories, Allmendream. I am simply sticking with the available evidence. My contention is that there was a rush by Gallo et al to blame AIDS on a virus. That Gallo and Heckler fingered HIV as the cause of AIDS at a press conference before any scientific debate could take place. After the press conference, no debate was allowed to take place, as evidenced by the treatment of Duesberg et al. If you want to call that a conspiracy, that is your prerogative, but I prefer to think of it as a huge scientific and medical debacle (now scandal) that the majority of scientists working on AIDS refuse to own up to, not to mention the pharmaceutical industry, who created drugs to fight AIDS based on the mistaken notion that HIV causes AIDS.

30 posted on 08/01/2008 8:41:06 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; allmendream

Count-your-change, I was reading through your reply for salient points, and didn’t see any. When I noticed that your reply starts all over again about half way down, I gave up. Can you make any sense of his post, Allmendream???


31 posted on 08/01/2008 8:44:55 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

You gave up too easily. Only part was double post. Call it repetition for emphasis.


32 posted on 08/01/2008 9:54:21 PM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

We know enough about HIV that either the information out there is accurate and HIV causes AIDS or hundreds of people are in on a conspiracy in both government and industry. As I said, I don’t go in for conspiracy theories, and the larger they are the less probable they become.


33 posted on 08/01/2008 10:03:18 PM PDT by allmendream (If "the New Yorker" makes a joke, and liberals don't get it, is it still funny?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Would you mind stating specifically where Duesberg et al were in error re: Acer/Bergalis?
34 posted on 08/02/2008 9:02:05 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
You keep using the word conspiracy. Perhaps you should provide a *strict* definition of what you mean by the term with respect to Duesberg’s portrayal of the AIDS establishment.
35 posted on 08/02/2008 9:04:23 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Duesberg’s position was/is that while the HIV might be present in an idividual with AIDS it didn’t cause the syndrome.
When Bergalis was diagnosed with AIDS the quesstion arose as to how. The dentist also had AIDS. DNA tests on the virus strain present in the dentist showed it was closely related to the strain Bergalis had. Other patients of the dentist that had AIDS showed no such close relatedness in the virus they carried.
Thus it was established the HIV Bergalis carried came from the dentist, how was never established. The dentist died as did Bergalis from AIDS. In some fashion Bergalis was infected with the HIV the dentist carried. Additionally Bergalis was not in any risk group.
Another infected dentist had several patients that became infected but using similar DNA tests as with Acer it was determined that the HIV in this dentist was different from the HIV in his patients so in this case there was no connection.
One of many sources that discuss the Bergalis case is found in the Annals of Internal Medicine 1 December 1994 | Volume 121 Issue 11 | Pages 886-888.


36 posted on 08/02/2008 9:36:43 AM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Another of Duesberg’s assertions is that many AIDS suffers were drug users and that their drug use and the administration of AZT actually produced the AIDS symptoms.
Here is a comment Duesberg made in an interview.
“The hypothesis(HIV causes AIDS) that cost us so much money did not save us one single life and the fact is, it caused the death of many people. THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATION OF AZT; THROUGH WIDESPREAD POISONOUS DRUGS THAT HAVE BEEN FREELY DISTRIBUTED IN THE WESTERN WORLD FOR LONG-TERM USE.”
The complete interview can be found at “Interview with Professor Dr. Peter Duesberg (University of California/Berkeley) at the Alt. AIDS Congress in Amsterdam 1993.www.whatisaids.com/ninainterviewduesberg.html
http://www.aliveandwell.org";
Further in the same interview Duesberg made this recommendation if one was taking AZT or other anti-HIV drugs.”
“DUESBERG: If someone AIDS? Well, that is a difficult question! OK, first of all one should stop taking these drugs! That's the first thing to do. And by all means not take these highly contaminated “AIDS treatment drugs” because people tested positive for HIV should no longer deteriorate as victims. It depends on how you look at it, you can get better or not. It's like when someone has smoked for 20 years. Either it is too late or it is not too late. If someone has been drinking excessively for 20 years, this can cause liver disease- by stoppping the drinking you can sometimes recover. Sometimes not. It just depends on the state of your health. There is one point where there is no turning back, just as in life, it goes slowly uphill. No matter what you do.”
Then the question is whether Duesberg is correct that AZT produce the sympoms associated with AIDS? Read on.
“1: N Engl J Med. 1987 Jul 23;317(4):185-91.Links
The efficacy of azidothymidine (AZT) in the treatment of patients with AIDS and AIDS-related complex. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Fischl MA, Richman DD, Grieco MH, Gottlieb MS, Volberding PA, Laskin OL, Leedom JM, Groopman JE, Mildvan D, Schooley RT, et al.
We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy of oral azidothymidine (AZT) in 282 patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) manifested by Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia alone, or with advanced AIDS-related complex. The subjects were stratified according to numbers of T cells with CD4 surface markers and were randomly assigned to receive either 250 mg of AZT or placebo by mouth every four hours for a total of 24 weeks. One hundred forty-five subjects received AZT, and 137 received placebo. When the study was terminated, 27 subjects had completed 24 weeks of the study, 152 had completed 16 weeks, and the remainder had completed at least 8 weeks. Nineteen placebo recipients and 1 AZT recipient died during the study (P less than 0.001). Opportunistic infections developed in 45 subjects receiving placebo, as compared with 24 receiving AZT. The base-line Karnofsky performance score and weight increased significantly among AZT recipients (P less than 0.001). A statistically significant increase in the number of CD4 cells was noted in subjects receiving AZT (P less than 0.001). After 12 weeks, the number of CD4 cells declined to pretreatment values among AZT recipients with AIDS but not amonG AZT recipients with AIDS-related complex. Skin-test anergy was partially reversed in 29 percent of subjects receiving AZT, as compared with 9 percent of those receiving placebo (P less than 0.001). These data demonstrate that AZT administration can decrease mortality and the frequency of opportunistic infections in a selected group of subjects with AIDS or AIDS-related complex, at least over the 8 to 24 weeks of observation in this study.
PMID: 3299089 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]”
I think I can say that no one who claims HIV is just a harmless virus will take an injection of the virus.
37 posted on 08/02/2008 10:44:22 AM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
A conspiracy:

1)An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2)A group of conspirators.
3)Law. An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4)A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

Mostly definition one and three would be applicable. If HIV doesn't cause AIDS then the evidence posted by thousands of medical care workers, Doctors, Pharmacologists, and Scientist are “in” on the conspiracy. Conspiracies that big simple do not exist except somewhere under a tinfoil hat.

38 posted on 08/03/2008 7:32:35 AM PDT by allmendream (If "the New Yorker" makes a joke, and liberals don't get it, is it still funny?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson