I have consolidated below some of the exchanges between Dr. Bolaji Aluko and scholars of AIDS. One issue has been resolved: all the interested parties will meet in Washington DC during the African Studies Association meeting to arrive at some consensus or narrow their differences.
EXCHANGE 1
Dr. Rasnick:
Thanks for your email. I am happy that you now have joined in the latest discussions - I almost wrote "tired or tiring" discussions - along with Drs. Gashekter and Mhlongo, and hopefully later on Dr. Kohnlein.
Please read my responses below.
In a message dated 12/26/2004 9:49:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, drasnick@comcast.net writes:
Dear Dr. Aluko,
You have many questions about questioning AIDS. I am glad. after a
quarter century of AIDS it is time to ask questions.
Better late than never ! Actually I had asked questions before, but some other issues had impinged a little on my time. 2005 may find me asking more questions on AIDS. I have started already.
I suggest that you
read a few articles that specifically address many of your questions
before proceeding with additional rounds of email questions. This will
save time and energy.
I agree. I had read a few articles before, but I have in the past two days updated myself on some more recent (and not so recent) write-ups.
I have a question for you.
1) When did you become aware that there are serious scientists and
other professionals who question the contagious/HIV hypothesis of AIDS?
Oh, that was ever since I became a peripheral AIDS activist in 1999, when I was a founding member /Secretary of the DC AIDS Network, (which we later renamed International African AIDS Network IAAN in 2000), and issued a widely-circulated "Open Letter to African Heads of State, Political and Religious Leaders on the AIDS Holocaust" released February 16, 2000 to coincide with National Summit on Africa, Washington, DC February 16-19, 2000:
See:
Actually, I came to AIDS activism ACCIDENTALLY via my Nigerian Pro-Deomcracy activism as a member of the Advocacy Network for Africa (ADNA) when there was quite a lot of AIDS talk back in 1999, and a number of us saw NO AFRICAN VOICES in the Washington DC AIDS circuit. After we (all full-time professionals in the Washington Area, and a few Church organizations) formed IAAN, we quickly found that there was an AIDS industry in the Washington Beltway that could take ALL of your time, and we decided to be more selective about our AIDS activities, about meetings and workshops and protests that we went to.
Also, around the time of the National Summit on Africa in Februrary 2000 was when Thabo Mbeki (installed to succeed Mandela in June/July 1999) was beginning to publicly question the connection of AIDS and HIV - I read somewhere that he used the Internet to independently do some research on his own, and I liked that. I also remember his quote to BBC's Frost that: "I think there is a need for people to be a little bit more profound, to be a bit more diligent in really understanding South Africa and not merely repeating mantras."
That was the sign of a progressive leader, but I am also cautious - or wary, suspicious - of politicians who may want to avoid spending money to improve the health of their citizens by questioning scientific evidence, but felt that in time things would be resolved SCIENTIFICALLY rather than POLITICALLY. I felt that he had enough integrity to be won over by good science.
So I have followed some of the discussions from afar - Back then, I particularly read up on Dr. Duesburg - including the later interventions of Mandela who had questioned Mbeki's wisdom of "fiddling while Rome burnt" over HIV/AIDS. I read about Mbeki caving in - or wisening up ? - to the connection.
So I had read about "serious scientists" - but I am also cautious about continually CONTROVERSIAL SCIENCE, because of my belief that well-designed research in science can resolve a lot of conflicting facts that may be thrown up about any scientific data. Also, I will admit always being skeptical about White Liberals - scientists or otherwise.
There was another troubling issue: many of the anti-HIV scientists seem to me to have arisen MAINLY from Dr. Duesburg's laboratory, so I have always wanted or preferred to have INDEPENDENT scientists - Africans, Asians, Latin Americans, etc. - buttressing his laboratory's skepticism, rather than repeating him as "mantra." I am not particularly keen on non-medical profesionals repeating any mantras of just one person, because that may be a result of ab initio bias for one particular position.
2) What led you to begin your own questioning of us?
The first immediate reason is that I was put on Dr. Toyin Falola's USA/Africa Dialogue just under a month ago, and last fortnight or so, an email or two on AIDS (around the December 1 Worlds AIDS Day or so) showed up, including Dr. Gashekter's email. So the immediate reason is the OPPORTUNITY to be able to exchange emails with those who have been in the forefront of the anti-AIDS movement.
The second reason was the recent announcement about problems with Nevapirine AIDs drug in Africa, and I said to myself "Hmmmm.....does that not ring a bell about sloppy research in Africa that Duesberg and his gang have been talking about all of these years ?" So that was serendipity.
Finally, by the way, I am a member of and Treasurer to the Board of Africa Action (www.africaaction.org) , and the current theme of our organization for mobilization is:
Africa's Right to Health Campaign
As you can see, Africa Action's approach to the numbers of AIDS sufferers in Africa is the conventional one, with the declaration of a "State of Emergency" in Africa"
So our Executive Director Salih Booker (to whom I am copying this email) and I are always on the look-out for new angles to health and AIDs issues that will be inform our activism in Africa, and I will be happy to have Salih discuss more fully with you at some point. He is a very articulate individual and does get called up a lot to state his and AA's views on issues on Africa. Like me, he is impatient with scientific controversy and just wants lives saved in Africa - but we are also reasonable people who are willing to listen to all sides.
I will send in a separate email one paper and two articles that address
AIDS in general and Africa specifically.
I have now received them and I have glanced through them. I will print them out and look at them more thouroughly. They will be very useful.
Finally, I suggest checking out the Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society
website http://aras.ab.ca/ . Under Top News! click on How many
Dissidents are there? More than you think. I counted 1117 professionals
who publicly question the contagious/HIV hypothesis.
I am not particularly keen on reading on dissidents. Good science is not determined by a head count. For example, as I wrote above, I am not particularly taken in by the NUMBERS of non-medical-science professionals who believe in a particular hypothesis or not. This is not the Middle Ages - science should not be OPINION, but based on well-designed research, honest documentation - and in situations where public or health policy is affected, simple transmission of results to the public, no matter how complex. As a scientist/engineer and an activist, I do not believe that there is anything in science that cannot be transmitted so simply that the public cannot understand and say "Ah yes, okay, I get that!" If you visit my website, while I write a lot of what would be called "social science" - from an engineer's point of view - when I write on STS (Science, Technology and Society) issues, I put down facts and try to bring them down QUITE A LOT to the ordinary (literate) person's level. See for example:
SUNDAY MUSINGS: NEPA, Electrical Energy and Nigeria - Unbundling Some Issues
MONDAY QUARTERBACKING: Why Not Build More Refineries?
So I would really like both sides of the controversy to remember that, and not obfuscate, or try to show each other up. Too many people are dying from SOMETHING - whether it is HIV/AIDS or NUDX ["New Unknown Disease X"] - or a cocktail of old diseases.
Have a happy, productive and enlightening New Year.
Same to you.
David Rasnick, PhD
Visiting Scholar
Dept. Molecular & Cell Biology
Room 353
Donner Laboratory
University of California at Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720
408-857-3505 cell
I finished by PhD (Chemical Engineering) in UC Santa Barbara in 1983, so we have something in common !
EXCHANGE 2
Dave:
Again, thanks for your latest reply, and the two or three documents that you sent or referred to.
Actually, for my own use, and for easy reference by those who visit my website, I have now put together a number of documents pro- and con- this HIV/AIDS controversy.
The site actually included some of the latest documents that you sent - and much more.
This is the re-start of my own little contribution in this important matter.
I am neither pro- or anti HIV/AIDS. I don't like the description "AIDS dissident" which the anti-AIDS-conventional-wisdom activsts seem to have accepted, because it has a negative connotation; they should look for a more positive description in the New Year ! For me, I am just pro-life (not in the right-wing sense o!), and I want to learn A LITTLE more of both sides point-of-view so that new insight may allow one to cut through the "fog of war" that has since enveloped both sides.
Should it be so difficult to easily state
- what is HIV ?
- what is AIDS ?
- what clinical tests have been used TO DATE to determine HIV, and what have been the relative advantages/disadvantages?
- ditto for AIDS ?
- why HIV and AIDS may or may not be related ?
- how are the numbers of HIV/AIDS sufferers determined, projected (eg by the different computer models) ?
We should be able to prepare a two or three pager outlining the simplest yet major issues around this disease, and get it in the hands of 1000, 1 million or 10 million influential people around the world - and I mean that both sides should be asked to come up with this, and let the world decide.
Let us make a distinction between arguments BETWEEN scientists, and information that PUBLIC POLICY persons and ORDINARY CITIZENS might need, and we may be able to sway people ONE WAY OR THE OTHER !
As I once implied, if we do NOTHING about HIV/AIDS, whether the numbers are as high as they are claimed to be or not, eventually they will become quite high.
There should be a new commitment for 2005.
Thanks for reading.
Bolaji Aluko
In a message dated 12/27/2004 9:49:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, drasnick@comcast.net writes:
Dear Dr. Aluko,
Thanks for your very thoughtful and well considered reply. Your
skepticism is sound and well founded. I suggest that it applies with
equal force to the $150 billion AIDS machine.
You say, "I am not particularly keen on reading on dissidents. Good
science is not determined by a head count. For example, as I wrote
above, I am not particularly taken in by the NUMBERS of
non-medical-science professionals who believe in a particular
hypothesis or not."
I agree completely. However, the mainstream's principal argument is the
overwhelming number of supporters of the contagious/HIV hypothesis.
A recent example of argument by number of believers was the petition in
2000 for signatories of the Durban Declaration that was circulated by
Simon Wain-Hobson of the Pasteur Institute in Paris. The purpose of the
Durban Declaration was to defuse the impact of Mbeki's AIDS Advisory
Panel.
The petition stated that: "The organizing committee of scientists and
front-line physicians has 181 members spread over 43 different
countries. The list of committee members follows the declaration. Among
them you will find David Baltimore, Sir Aaron Klug, President of the
Royal Society, Luc Montagnier, Rolf Zinkernagel and many more. The
object is to get as many names of scientists and doctors to sign on."
.. "Many of you will say that HIV/AIDS is not your area. However over
the years you have heard enough of the arguments to understand the
association. Furthermore many of you know well infectious diseases and
understand Koch's postulates. If you have colleagues in the laboratory
or in the clinic who you feel would like to sign on please ask them.
The more the better. However, please note that in order to be
authoritative we feel it necessary to restrict the list to those with
major university qualifications. Hence please do not ask students."
I have attached the full solicitation and our reply published in
Nature.
You ask are there others besides Duesberg and his small group who
question the contagious/HIV hypothesis. I recommended the Alberta
Reappraising AIDS Society website http://aras.ab.ca/ to specifically
counter the oft repeated argument that Peter Duesberg is virtually the
only scientist to question mainstream AIDS dogma. The 1117 dissidents
listed are largely MDs and PhDs. Indeed, one third of Mbeki's AIDS
Advisory Panel is comprised of scientists and doctors from around the
world who independently question AIDS dogma. I will send in a separate
email the Interim Report of the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel so you
can see who they are.
The scale and scope of AIDS make it qualitatively different from other
supposedly scientific and medical enterprises.
I have found the best way to understand AIDS is to recognize that it is
primarily a political and sociological phenomenon. Science and medicine
have very little to do with understanding AIDS. In time, you may come
to see this yourself.
All the best,
Dave
EXCHANGE 3
Dr. Aluko,
Excellent! I checked out http://www.nigerianmuse.com/projects/AIDSProject and was impressed by the even-handedness.
I suggest that a debate of the arguments for and against the contagious/HIV hypothesis of AIDS among the few of us via email is not the best use of our time. Perhaps, instead, we can discuss how best to bring this debate to a much larger audience. From considerable experience, I can tell you that this will be a very difficult thing to do. The mainstream does everything in its power to prevent such a public discussion.
Given the numbers of believers, media/political support, and enormous financial and institutional resources, coupled with the absolute conviction that the contagious/HIV hypothesis is correct, one would think AIDS Inc. would be eager to face its critics and publicly demolish us in front of the people of the world. Given its claims about AIDS, the mainstream is morally and ethically bond to produce the evidence and arguments that address most if not all of the criticisms of the dissidents. Thabo Mbeki provided AIDS Inc. the perfect public venue to do just that. Instead, the chose to publish the Durban Declaration. Dissident, by the way, is a fine and noble label. We didn't ask for it; it was given to us. It is such a good label, in fact, that the mainstream has stopped calling us dissidents and now label us denialists.
Dave
On Dec 27, 2004, at 7:59 AM, Alukome@aol.com wrote:
Dave:
Again, thanks for your latest reply, and the two or three documents that you sent or referred to.
Actually, for my own use, and for easy reference by those who visit my website, I have now put together a number of documents pro- and con- this HIV/AIDS controversy.
See: http://www.nigerianmuse.com/projects/AIDSProject
The site actually included some of the latest documents that you sent - and much more.
This is the re-start of my own little contribution in this important matter.
I am neither pro- or anti HIV/AIDS. I don't like the description "AIDS dissident" which the anti-AIDS-conventional-wisdom activsts seem to have accepted, because it has a negative connotation; they should look for a more positive description in the New Year ! For me, I am just pro-life (not in the right-wing sense o!), and I want to learn A LITTLE more of both sides point-of-view so that new insight may allow one to cut through the "fog of war" that has since enveloped both sides.
Should it be so difficult to easily state
- what is HIV ?
- what is AIDS ?
- what clinical tests have been used TO DATE to determine HIV, and what have been the relative advantages/disadvantages?
- ditto for AIDS ?
- why HIV and AIDS may or may not be related ?
- how are the numbers of HIV/AIDS sufferers determined, projected (eg by the different computer models) ?
We should be able to prepare a two or three pager outlining the simplest yet major issues around this disease, and get it in the hands of 1000, 1 million or 10 million influential people around the world - and I mean that both sides should be asked to come up with this, and let the world decide.
Let us make a distinction between arguments BETWEEN scientists, and information that PUBLIC POLICY persons and ORDINARY CITIZENS might need, and we may be able to sway people ONE WAY OR THE OTHER !
As I once implied, if we do NOTHING about HIV/AIDS, whether the numbers are as high as they are claimed to be or not, eventually they will become quite high.
There should be a new commitment for 2005.
Thanks for reading.
Bolaji Aluko
In a message dated 12/27/2004 9:49:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, drasnick@comcast.net writes:
Dear Dr. Aluko,
Thanks for your very thoughtful and well considered reply. Your
skepticism is sound and well founded. I suggest that it applies with
equal force to the $150 billion AIDS machine.
You say, "I am not particularly keen on reading on dissidents. Good
science is not determined by a head count. For example, as I wrote
above, I am not particularly taken in by the NUMBERS of
non-medical-science professionals who believe in a particular
hypothesis or not."
I agree completely. However, the mainstream's principal argument is the
overwhelming number of supporters of the contagious/HIV hypothesis.
A recent example of argument by number of believers was the petition in
2000 for signatories of the Durban Declaration that was circulated by
Simon Wain-Hobson of the Pasteur Institute in Paris. The purpose of the
Durban Declaration was to defuse the impact of Mbeki's AIDS Advisory
Panel.
The petition stated that: "The organizing committee of scientists and
front-line physicians has 181 members spread over 43 different
countries. The list of committee members follows the declaration. Among
them you will find David Baltimore, Sir Aaron Klug, President of the
Royal Society, Luc Montagnier, Rolf Zinkernagel and many more. The
object is to get as many names of scientists and doctors to sign on."
... "Many of you will say that HIV/AIDS is not your area. However over
the years you have heard enough of the arguments to understand the
association. Furthermore many of you know well infectious diseases and
understand Koch's postulates. If you have colleagues in the laboratory
or in the clinic who you feel would like to sign on please ask them.
The more the better. However, please note that in order to be
authoritative we feel it necessary to restrict the list to those with
major university qualifications. Hence please do not ask students."
I have attached the full solicitation and our reply published in
Nature.
You ask are there others besides Duesberg and his small group who
question the contagious/HIV hypothesis. I recommended the Alberta
Reappraising AIDS Society website http://aras.ab.ca/ to specifically
counter the oft repeated argument that Peter Duesberg is virtually the
only scientist to question mainstream AIDS dogma. The 1117 dissidents
listed are largely MDs and PhDs. Indeed, one third of Mbeki's AIDS
Advisory Panel is comprised of scientists and doctors from around the
world who independently question AIDS dogma. I will send in a separate
email the Interim Report of the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel so you
can see who they are.
The scale and scope of AIDS make it qualitatively different from other
supposedly scientific and medical enterprises.
I have found the best way to understand AIDS is to recognize that it is
primarily a political and sociological phenomenon. Science and medicine
have very little to do with understanding AIDS. In time, you may come
to see this yourself.
All the best,
Dave
EXCHANGE 4
Dr. Rasnick:
Thanks for visiting my Webpage, and for being "impressed!" Although I usually start out "even-handed," once I am convinced about an issue, I never mind being "single-handed" or "single-minded" !
As to the labels "dissident" or "denialist", I will take the former over the latter. So I will drop my earlier objection, since I do not readily have a catchy "positive" alternative label to either one.
Finally, athough the discussion among a few of us so far has been very useful, I agree with you when you wrote that:
QUOTE
I suggest that a debate of the arguments for and against the
contagious/HIV hypothesis of AIDS among the few of us via email is not
the best use of our time. Perhaps, instead, we can discuss how best to
bring this debate to a much larger audience. From considerable
experience, I can tell you that this will be a very difficult thing to
do. The mainstream does everything in its power to prevent such a
public discussion.
UNQUOTE
I have hinted at this in an earlier email, when I stated that it may be possible to provide such a forum at Howard University, and may be able to interest Africa Action in it.
If you had such a well-worked out public forum plan before that was, for one or other reason, shelved, you may want to share it with us. There are no assurances, but we must try, try and try again. One never knows what effort will yield fruit.
Again, the idea is not controversy for controversy sake, but to reduce the rhetoric on both sides and cut through the fog, so that lives of people all over the world, particularly in Africa, can be saved quickly. Sometimes, these controversies develop into personal enmities even among people who have never met each other, leading to people talking past each other. When enormous sums of money are also involved - "Mammon" to us Christians - the devil then works the details !
Best wishes.
Bolaji Aluko
In a message dated 12/27/2004 11:37:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, drasnick@comcast.net writes:
Dr. Aluko,
Excellent! I checked out
http://www.nigerianmuse.com/projects/AIDSProject and was impressed by
the even-handedness.
I suggest that a debate of the arguments for and against the
contagious/HIV hypothesis of AIDS among the few of us via email is not
the best use of our time. Perhaps, instead, we can discuss how best to
bring this debate to a much larger audience. From considerable
experience, I can tell you that this will be a very difficult thing to
do. The mainstream does everything in its power to prevent such a
public discussion.
Given the numbers of believers, media/political support, and enormous
financial and institutional resources, coupled with the absolute
conviction that the contagious/HIV hypothesis is correct, one would
think AIDS Inc. would be eager to face its critics and publicly
demolish us in front of the people of the world. Given its claims about
AIDS, the mainstream is morally and ethically bond to produce the
evidence and arguments that address most if not all of the criticisms
of the dissidents. Thabo Mbeki provided AIDS Inc. the perfect public
venue to do just that. Instead, the chose to publish the Durban
Declaration. Dissident, by the way, is a fine and noble label. We
didn't ask for it; it was given to us. It is such a good label, in
fact, that the mainstream has stopped calling us dissidents and now
label us denialists.
Dave
EXCHANGE 5
Dear Bolaji:
These are all finely acute observations on your part regarding HIV antibody tests and the counting of "AIDS" cases in Africa. They are central and long overdue.
These key questions really need to be directed succinctly and repetitiously at those who believe that the people of Africa have been afflicted by a new, viral-caused set of symptoms that are ultimately transmitted via one of the most unstoppable acts that heterosexual humans engage in.
Let me reiterate how important it is to get clear, brief answers to several questions that I posed earlier, to wit, 1) the actual number of verifiable cases of AIDS in Gauteng Province in South Africa for a variety of recent years; 2) the total number of deaths said to be cases of AIDS; 3) the breakdown of those deaths by age, gender, and race; 4) some clear and objective sense of how public health officials, nurses, or physicians went about determining that the actual cause of death was "due to AIDS," and 5) the total number of deaths from all causes in Gauteng for those years and the other causes as well.
South Africa maintains the best system of vital statistics in all of Africa. But if the adherents or believers in the AIDS orthodoxy cannot or will not provide you with answers to those basic questions, I hope it will give you ample reason to pause when hearing vast numbers that they provide about a continent of 11 1/2 million square miles and 650 million people.
When it comes to relentlessly challenging and carefully dissecting the many widely-held beliefs about HIV or AIDS in Africa, it is wise to recall the reminder of Ibsen, that "Truths are by no means the wiry Methuselehs some people think they are. A normally constituted truth lives as a rule, seventeen or eighteen years; at the outside twenty, seldom longer. And truths so stricken in years are always shockingly thin."
All the best,
Charles Geshekter
=======
on 12/24/04 2:47 PM, Alukome@aol.com at Alukome@aol.com wrote:
Charles:
The importance of the subject matter makes me to ignore little things like typos and grammar lapes ! :-)
The concern for me in this AIDS business always has been that while these controversies have been going on, I am aware that there is something new (?) "out there" - call it HIV/AIDs or "Disease X" - that is causing multiple "clinical symptoms (of) ever, cough, diarrhea, or weight loss" among many peoples of the world, including millions of Africans in particular, that is causing them to eventually die almost without amelioration, except in developed countries, where it has since been reduced to a chronic illness by a cocktail of drugs, among other things.
In 53 countries in Africa, there CERTAINLY must be ONE COUNTRY that will allow those like you and your colleagues who do not believe that it is HIV/AIDS - or doubt it seriously - to do and report clinical trials to show that it is "Disease X" - and then appropriately name the disease and accurately measure the number of its sufferers- so that we all can go ahead with the proper and humane business of containing it, rather than haggling over its name or even its origin.
I just read Christine Maggiore - as quoted in Dialogue 176 - in which she makes a statement that:
QUOTE
Further, the women involved in the trial were diagnosed HIV positive based on a single ELISA test, a protocol that would constitute medical malpractice in the US. As you may
know, the ELISA test kit literature warns that pregnancy can cause false HIV
positive results.
UNQUOTE
It appears to me that those of you in the MEDICAL aspect of this field - as different from those of us at its ACTIVIST end - should simply be able to state that:
1. In the West/Developed world, Test 1, Test 2 followed by Test 3 are employed on Blood (and/or Saliva ?) samples of Subject A in order to POSITIVELY state that Subject A is HIV/AIDS positive.
2. In Africa/Developing world, Only Test 1 (and/or Test 2) is used, and once it is positive, Subject A is stated to be HIV/AIDS positive.
3. Furthermore, by the way, these are the results in the West/Developed world that show that if Test 1 ONLY had been applied to women who are pregnant AND who have been ascertained NOT to be HIV positive by the battery of tests, they would have been stated to be HIV/AIDS positive.
I just don't know why those who love Africa - including yourselves AS WELL AS presumably African leaders - have not been able to COMMISSION such a study, for goodness sakes ! If there is such a study, then we should MAKE THE INFORMATION widely availabel ALL BY ITSELF without confusing it with other issues.
I just scratch my head at times.
Bolaji Aluko
In a message dated 12/24/2004 12:01:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, chollygee@earthlink.net writes:
Dear Bolaji:
Good to be in touch with you.
Sorry for the sloppy typos and occasional lapses in grammar that marred my overly-rapid response to your good and vital questions.
I hope you have a chance to read our longer paper which expounds further on your questions and the brief answers that I provided.
Best regards and season's greetings
Charles Geshekter
=========
on 12/23/04 7:47 PM, Alukome@aol.com at Alukome@aol.com wrote:
Dr. Geshekter:
Thanks for your rapid responses to my questions. I promise not to ask ANY further questions of you until you return from your well-deserved holiday. :-)
In the meantime, I have re-organized our question-and-answers session (!) so as to give your colleagues (Dr. Mhlongo and Koehlein) opportunity to chip in, if possible in your absence.
Seasons greetings.
Bolaji Aluko
_____________________________________________________________________________
QUESTIONS-AND-ANSWERS ON AIDS IN AFRICA
QUESTION # 1
--------------------
ALUKO: What, according to your studies, is/are the best indicator test(s) for HIV/AIDs ?
GESHEKTER: First of all, it is crucial that we separate or distinguish any discussion about HIV antibodies from the discussion about the clinical symptoms that define (according to the WHO) and AIDS case in Africa.
MHLONGO:
KOHNLEIN:
QUESTION # 2
--------------------
ALUKO: What is your best estimate of the actual number of HIV/AIDS patients/sufferers in Africa now ?
GESHEKTER: There is no way of answering this question based on the available evidence given the contradictory definitions of an HIV case or an AIDS case being counted, the shabby nature of record-keeping in much of Africa, or the fact that nearly all "estimates" are based on the flimsiest of data. South Africa has the best system of vital statistics in Africa. Ask someone involved with AIDS in South Africa to tell you the number of HIV cases actually recorded in Gauteng Province for 2000 and 2001, and the number of AIDS case in Gauteng for 2000 and 2001, and have them break those numbers down by age, race, and gender. As they prevaricate, you will why it is nearly impossible to make sweeping statement about all of Africa when people cannot provide specific numbers for a major Province in South Africa. I would also ask them to provide mortality numbers for Gauteng for 1995, 2000, 2001 and 2002, giving cause of death and the other relevent breakdown categories.
MHLONGO:
KOHNLEIN:
QUESTION # 3
--------------------
ALUKO: What can be done about such patients - by government and by the patients themselves ?
GESHEKTER: This is best answered by my two physician colleagues, Dr. Sam Mhlongo and Dr. Claus Kohnlein, both of whom have considerable clinical experience with patients said to suffer from "AIDS." The only thing I can add is that the physician typically should treatment the patient's clinical symptoms - fever, cough, diarrhea, or weight loss - NOT some surrogate marker like HIV antibodies or viral load. I believe the term is "clinical endpoints."
MHLONGO:
KOHNLEIN:
QUESTION # 4
--------------------
ALUKO: What can happen if NOTHING is done about them ?
GESHEKTER: I would once again defer to my two physician colleagues on this matter. The key question to be answered is what is the patient suffering from? Once that is answered, then the possible range of treatments can be considered.
MHLONGO:
KOHNLEIN:
_____________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 12/23/2004 10:26:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, chollygee@earthlink.net writes:
on 12/23/04 7:09 PM, Alukome@aol.com at Alukome@aol.com wrote:
TF:
I have followed the "controversies" surrounding Dr. Geshekter's claims, and I have four questions for him, as my sincere "welcome" to him to the list:
1. What, according to his studies, is/are the best indicator test(s) for HIV/AIDs ?
2. What his best estimate of the actual number of HIV/AIDS patients/sufferers in Africa now ?
3. What can be done about such patients - by government and by the patients themselves ?
4. What can happen if NOTHING is done about them ?
It is most likely that all of these questions can be answered by going through many of the references to which Dr. Dr. Geshekter referred, but I have asked them simply to see whether one can get simple answers to the questions. If not, I am prepared to wade through the references.
Thanks.
Bolaji Aluko
IAAN Secretary
==========
Dear Bolaji:
My answers will be very brief for now since I am about to leave on holiday. I can elaborate if you wish in a week or so.
#1 First of all, it is crucial that we separate or distinguish any discussion about HIV antibodies from the discussion about the clinical symptoms that define (according to the WHO) and AIDS case in Africa.
#2 There is no way of answering this question based on the available evidence given the contradictory definitions of an HIV case or an AIDS case being counted, the shabby nature of record-keeping in much of Africa, or the fact that nearly all "estimates" are based on the flimsiest of data. South Africa has the best system of vital statistics in Africa. Ask someone involved with AIDS in South Africa to tell you the number of HIV cases actually recorded in Gauteng Province for 2000 and 2001, and the number of AIDS case in Gauteng for 2000 and 2001, and have them break those numbers down by age, race, and gender. As they prevaricate, you will why it is nearly impossible to make sweeping statement about all of Africa when people cannot provide specific numbers for a major Province in South Africa. I would also ask them to provide mortality numbers for Gauteng for 1995, 2000, 2001 and 2002, giving cause of death and the other relevent breakdown categories.
#3 This is best answered by my two physician colleagues, Dr. Sam Mhlongo and Dr. Claus Kohnlein, both of whom have considerable clinical experience with patients said to suffer from "AIDS." The only thing I can add is that the physician typically should treatment the patient's clinical symptoms - fever, cough, diarrhea, or weight loss - NOT some surrogate marker like HIV antibodies or viral load. I believe the term is "clinical endpoints."
#4 I would once again defer to my two physician colleagues on this matter. The key question to be answered is what is the patient suffering from? Once that is answered, then the possible range of treatments can be considered.
EXCHANGE 6
Charles:
I am really excited about many of your latest disclosures - first that you are a Howard U. alumnus, and secondly that the ASA annual meeting moves to Washington DC late next year !
That is serendipity, and I certainly will work with Salih Booker and Toyin Falola to see what we can do with or without ASA ! [I was invited to ASA in Atlanta several years ago, to a Nigerian session on democracy. I enjoyed it, and have since then looked forward to another attendance.]
I can assure you that something will happen in the Washington DC area next year 2005. When it is is what we don't know, and whether we can coax the Pro-HIV to attend will be another challenge, because I know that "dissidents" are always ready to attend !
Bolaji Aluko
Thoroughly exhausted by the firestorm of discussions
With these frontline AIDS dissidents!
EXCHANGE 7
My final puzzle is about the relationship of AIDs to sexual transmission - or
> more generally blood tranmmission. Malaria and fever and cough and poverty
> and hunger cannot be transmitted by blood mixing. Is there NO evidence of
> sexual transmission of HIV/AIDS, and if there is, is the claim that it is then
> a transmission of tuberculosis or what ?
>
> Now that I have your attention, folks, I will keep at it. I have never had
> the opportunity to interrogate the AID-skeptics, and I am not going to let go
> of the opportunity! :-)
>
> As Toyin Falola knows, when I decide to go after something, I go after it
> relentlessly.
>
============
Dear Bolaji:
In reference to your first paragraph above.....I assume that surely, after
all these years of "living in the Era of AIDS," after all the billions of
dollars that have been spent "fighting the war on AIDS,", after thousands of
conferences have been held, and an estimated 200,000 papers written on the
subject, that there must be clear, compelling, and strong empirical data to
answer your questions....isn't there?
As an aside, from my vantage point in northern California, I often wonder
how the wily retrovirus called "HIV" has been able to infect certain
populations in certain zipcodes (postal codes) in this areas, while leaving
other populations in other nearby zipcodes alone. I would if anyone out
there can provide an evidence-based answer to that conundrum?
Best regards,
Charles Geshekter
--