Might also want to read/check out the following links by the same author:

Is The AIDS Virus A Science Fiction?: Immunosuppressive Behavior, Not HIV, May Be the Cause of AIDS

Policy Review (Hoover Institution), 1990

http://www.duesberg.com/about/pdpolicy.html

Peter Duesberg's website:

http://www.duesberg.com/about/index.html

Duesberg has been bunked, debunked and punk'd more times than John Kerry. Why are you hyping this lunatic's junk science 10-20 years on...Geesh.

Here is part 1 of the audio presentation. This part goes into the recent and dismal history behind what led to blaming AIDS on the wrong cause:

http://www.attacreport.com/ar_audio/ref_aids_video_1.htm

That's because I don't consider it junk science, of course.

Duesberg has been bunked, debunked and punk'd more times than John Kerry. Why are you hyping this lunatic's junk science 10-20 years on...Geesh.

Probably because it makes sense, and because the HIV lobby, like the "Global Warming" true believers, would rather attack sources than argue facts.

-Eric

I suggest you read the Policy Review Artice I posted above and then click the link to Duesberg's website for more up to date information. Having said that, the Policy Review article summarizes their basic hypothesis...which was crushed by the Virus Hunters and the Public Health fanatics from the word go...

I've read some of Duesberg's work when it came out in the 90s. There are many anomolies in AIDS research, true. And it has become so heavily politicized, with an enormous economic stake of the AIDS proprietors in keeping it going, that you can't really trust the scientists who work in this area.

Is AIDS caused by the HIV virus? I'm really not certain. But I didn't find Duesberg's alternate theories entirely persuasive. Although he is probably correct in arguing that gay lifestyles, illicit drugs, and AIDS drug cocktails have made things worse.

AIDS in Africa is wildly exaggerated. The spread of the condom culture has only made things worse. AIDS in America is basically a protected epidemic, where the medical and political authorities do more to help spread it than control it. I would believe almost any alternate theory to this sort of craziness, but I don't think Duesberg entirely makes his case.

At least you are keeping an open mind, which is more than I can say for some on this thread! BTW, did you read Ellison and Duesberg's book...I found it VERY convincing.

Thanks Eric, this is national/international debate (read: fight) that still needs to happen no matter how hard the Public Health Movement tries to suppress it.

Indeed, Duesberg was even offered a bribe by Public Health officials to keep his mouth shut about the real cause of AIDS (link below):

---

Letter to Peter Duesberg Regarding Bribery

Via Federal Express

Joel A. Schwartz
3463 State Street, #135
Santa Barbara, CA 93105

Dr. Peter H. Duesberg
University of California Dept. of Molecular and Cell Biology
229 Stanley Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720

July 1, 1996

Dear Dr. Duesberg,


The debate over the cause of AIDS has, of course, many far-reaching consequences. It throws into question the entire course of federal spending and policy in the War on AIDS, including the current treatments for AIDS.

However, a new and larger issue is beginning to emerge from this controversy.

A growing body of evidence indicates that governmental agencies, acting directly or through the Public Health lobby, have been attempting to hide the AIDS controversy from public knowledge. According to this evidence, various Public Health officials have used influence, bribery, and intimidation to silence dissent among scientists, in the communications media, and in other public forums.

As the scandal of a government cover-up becomes public knowledge, taxpayers and voters are demanding a full accounting of the secret measures being used to silence dissent. I am writing on behalf of this growing movement.

It has come to our attention that you have been one of the targets of this cover-up. Specifically, you have publicly admitted that officials of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have offered you compensation for recanting your position on AIDS. But you have so far refused to identify these officials or the exact terms of the offers. As an establishment scientist who has received government funding, you owe the American public a full disclosure of the facts.

For the record, I now call on you to provide the answers to the following questions:

1) On November 9, 1995, you gave sworn testimony that an official of the NIH visited you in late 1994 and made you an offer in exchange for your agreement to recant your views on AIDS. You confirmed the existence of this meeting in the book "Inventing the AIDS Virus", released this year, which lists you as the sole author. What was the exact date and place of that meeting?

2) What is the name of the NIH official with whom you met?

3) Who else was present at that meeting?

4) In your testimony, you stated that this NIH official handed you a letter declaring that HIV causes AIDS. On this letter were three names: yours, and two others - one of whom you refer to as an "old friend." What were the names of these other signers, and which one did you refer to as an "old friend"?

5) Who authorized these NIH officials to make you this offer? Who else, in the government or elsewhere, was aware of this offer?

6) You have stated that, had you accepted the offer in full, the letter was to be published in Nature magazine. You have also mentioned Nature editor John Maddox as having been involved. Did John Maddox know about the offer, and the meeting, before they took place? Did Maddox agree to use his magazine as a forum to publish the letter? Which NIH officials were in contact with Maddox regarding this offer? Have you communicated with Maddox regarding this letter? If so, what did you and Maddox say?

7) Who actually wrote the letter? Please provide a copy of the complete letter.

8) What, precisely, were you offered in return for signing the letter?

9) Precisely how long did you take to think over the offer?

10) What factor(s) did you consider while making a decision on the offer?

11) What was your final answer to the offer? Did you accept any part of their offer? Did you make any counter-offers?

12) When did you first publicly reveal that this offer was made to you? Where did you reveal this?

13) Are there any terms the government could offer that would persuade you to recant your views on AIDS - even against the scientific evidence?

14) According to testimony we have received, you have privately admitted the existence of previous offers made to you in return for your willingness to change your position on AIDS. Written documents also suggest the existence of such offers.

a) What were the exact dates and places of those meetings?

b) What were the names of the persons who met with you at those times, or who helped arrange those meetings?

c) Were you given letters to sign at any of those meetings? If so, please provide copies of each of those documents.

d) Who authorized each of those offers? Who else was aware of those offers?

e) What were the terms of each of those offers (what were you asked to do, and what were you promised in return)?

f) How long did you take to make a decision on each of those offers?

g) What was your answer to each of those offers?

h) Have you publicly revealed any of these previous offers made to you? When did you reveal them? Where did you reveal them?

15) Have you received any such offers since 1994?

16) Have you been made any offers by Alfred Regnery, or by any of his agents or associates, in return for your cooperation regarding the AIDS debate? Did you agree to take any information out of the book you co-authored with Bryan Ellison?

Certainly you must agree that the federal government cannot be allowed to censor this AIDS debate, or any other controversy, from public view. As a scientist involved in such a debate, you have a special responsibility to disclose all government attempts to suppress opposition. The public has a right to know.

I therefore assume you will provide the above answers in a timely manner.

Thank you.

Sincerely,


Joel A. Schwartz

Link:

http://www.duesberg.com/about/bribepd.html

Thought you might find this interesting--TTS

I thought this was a valid hypothesis about 15 years ago, but to cling to it in the face of current evidence is to deny the obvious. We have effective drugs to treat HIV now and when you knock peoples viral load back down to barely detectable levels their T-cells replenish themselves and they stop dying of AIDS.

Okay , , , what is "the real cause of AIDS"?

[And no I'm not going to take the time to go to this guy's web site so please just tell me. Thanks! 8^)]

I'd like to make 2 comments:

1. In the 90's a report came out (I don't have the link) that about half of the US military in Germany were HIV+, why haven't we heard more about this IF they are dropping dead?

2. AIDS was FIRST mentioned in one of Beverly Sills' books (the opera singer) - she said she saw gay men dying of a strange disease, this was back in the 50's or 60's. Why hasn't anyone else picked up on this?

You can read a fairly abbreviated version of what causes AIDS in the following Policy Review article. If this causes you to want to learn more, visit Duesberg's website above:

http://www.duesberg.com/about/pdpolicy.html

Because they are NOT DROPPING DEAD...nor will they, because AIDS is NOT infectious.

"The only place reported AIDS cases come anywhere near the projections is in Africa. But this may be explained by physician Felix Konotey-Ahulu of Ghanda, who after touring Africa in search of AIDS wrote a scathing editorial for the Lancet in 1987. African AIDS statistics are purposely inflated because "Where there was 'AIDS' there was money," Konotey-Ahulu reported, "a brand-new clinic, a new Mercedes parked outside, high-paying jobs. ... A leading African physician warned us 'You will never get these doctors to tell you the truth. When they get sent to these AIDS conferences around the world, the per diem they receive is equal to what they can earn in a whole year at home.' "

http://www.ncc-1776.com/tle1995/le951103.html

BEHAVIOR causes the spread of AIDS; the actual vehicle is immaterial.

Don't do the behavior, don't get AIDS!

Here's another "idiots guide" to the Duesberg/Ellison (not to mention thousands of other top scientists) hypothesis:

http://www.attacreport.com/ar_archives/art_na_aids.htm