Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Open letter to Gary Null about Clark Baker and Gallo's Egg

Mr. Gary Null,

With all due respect, there is enough room for everybody to speak up on this issue without meeting anyone's criteria of "knowing enough". You certainly have the right to decide who and what you promote on your website and/or radio show. But your cursory dismissal of Clark Barker and his investigation speaks volumes about you. Did you actually read the article or did you immediately judge it as unworthy of your attention?

I appreciate the work that you have done, Mr. Null. However, Clark Baker, being an former law enforcement officer, former Marine Corp Sergeant and a current private investigator with an apparent solid reputation and history of standing for the Truth (often without financial compensation), has the resources to come at this from a very unique and fresh angle. Your videos, articles and books have enlightened me, angered me, depressed me, but never did they give me a feeling of hope as Mr. Baker's single article has done. He is not just spreading the truth, he is not just talking about it, HE IS REALLY DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

The fact that you would not promote his work or feel that I "have it in reverse" is highly disappointing as I have, up to this point, respected you for the work you've done. There is no room for EGO in this very serious matter and I did not realize that you felt that you had cornered the market on exposing the criminal activities of those defending the HIV=AIDS myth. How many lawsuits have you filed against any of these criminals? Or are you just out to promote and sell your own products? I find it very difficult to respect anyone that so obviously worships at the alter of the almighty dollar and robes their ego with an elitist attitude making themselves like some kind of an untouchable holy man. I now see you as someone who sees this issue as something to capitalize on for money and recognition.

After receiving your disappointing response, as someone whose life as been negatively impacted over the last 15+ years by being branded "HIV positive", I would have to support the work of Mr. Baker over yours, regardless of the length of experience. Mr. Baker is obviously out for the truth and not self aggrandizement as it appears you are. Elitism and over inflated ego's are destroying this planet. It is precisely because of Mr. Gallo's ego, surrounded by hungry greed, that so many lives have been destroyed over the last 25 years by the HIV myth. Everywhere you look you can see the destruction of society being precisely caused by sociopaths with over inflated egos and greed. It's a bigger problem than AIDS... It's killing millions of people everyday.

I will still reluctantly recommend that people watch your videos because there is so little out there, they disclose a lot of information and they can be seen for free. AND GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT THERE IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT and I will support anyone who is speaking the truth. However, I will also let everyone know, similar to most medical doctors, your ego overshadows much of what you do and not to expect you to do more than promote your own self interests and line your own pocketbook.

It's not about you Mr. Null and it's not even about Clark Baker.... It's about people like me whose lives have been negatively impacted by this criminal lie perpetuated by the medical industry, pharmaceutical companies, The FDA, insurance companies, greedy doctors and the government. And more importantly, it's about the lives of those thousands whose trust is being violated and are still being indoctrinated every single day into the HIV=AIDS religion and are then fed the sacrament of HAART only to be slowly poisoned to death to the great financial benefit of a relatively few dangerous sociopaths.

David G Collins

Gary Null wrote:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:30:09 -0400
From: Gary Null <>
To: <>
References: <

I think you have it in reverse. He should take a look at the documentary Aids Inc. , read the book Aids A Second Opinion and read some of the two thousands interviews and quotes from the leading scientists and dissidents on Aids,. He is just beginning a long journey where we have already been. It is always good to add another passionate voice to the movement.

----- Original Message ----- From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:21 AM
Subject: Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show

Please also consider having Clark Baker on your Radio Show!

Podcast Available - Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show

You can listen to the podcast of the interview here

and an off air interview after the show here

Thank You,

David Collins

HIV, AIDS & Gallo’s Egg - Clark Baker

Gallo’s Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show

Gary Null's response to Clark Baker and Gallo's Egg

Egocentric & Elitist Response By Gary Null To Gallo's Egg

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Gary Null's response to Clark Baker and Gallo's Egg

Well, it appears that Gary Null's opinion is that although Clark Baker is good to have as another voice, that he is basically a newbie who has a long way to go...

I sent Mr. Null two messages. One, suggesting he might post Mr. Baker's article on his website and two, suggesting he might have Mr. Baker on his radio show. The response I received is copied below. See my thoughts about his response below that...


Gary Null wrote:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:30:09 -0400
From: Gary Null <>
To: <>
References: <>

> I think you have it in reverse. He should take a look at the documentary Aids Inc. , read the book Aids A Second Opinion and read some of the two thousands interviews and quotes from the leading scientists and dissidents on Aids,. He is just beginning a long journey where we have already been. It is always good to add another passionate voice to the movement.

> ----- Original Message -----
From: <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:21 AM
> Subject: Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show
>> Please also consider having Clark Baker on your Radio Show!
>> Podcast Available - Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show
>> You can listen to the podcast of the interview here
>> and an off air interview after the show here
>> Thank You,
>> David Collins


I got the feeling that Mr. Null was being condescending in his response and coming from his "ego". It seems that to Gary Null it is more about Gary Null than the message. Because, of course, he recommended that Mr. Baker watch HIS video and read HIS book to be fully informed... He did not suggest the work of anyone else other than the ambiguous "two thousands interviews and quotes from the leading scientists and dissidents".

I'm not sure what makes Mr. Null so sure that Mr. Clark has not done this research. He just seems to assume. I suppose it's because of the amount of time Mr. Clark as spent on this. Apparently there is a certain amount of time and a certain amount of specific information you must have before you are "qualified" to speak up on this issue or even begin to ask questions. I haven't read those guidelines myself... Can someone direct me to the rulebook?

I realize the benefit of having as much solid information as possible before venturing into scientific debate, but one could also spend an entire lifetime researching all there is to know about a subject and never contribute a thing... Everyone has to start somewhere. Frankly, with the reputation and resources that Mr. Baker appears to have, I'm glad that he is not waiting until some distant time in the future to begin speaking out.

I certainly don't mean to slight the good work that Mr. Null has done by asking him to help promote Mr. Baker. But, I think that Mr. Baker's approach and the position from which he is approaching it is rather unique. I could be wrong because, even though I've had to deal with the HIV/AIDS world for 15 years, I'm still a newbie to a lot of the dissident and the technical information.

I think, maybe, according to Mr. Gary Null, I am not even qualified to speak up about this.

Basically, I was disappointed in Mr. Null's uninspiring, unmotivating response. Especially when compared to the response of Robert Scott Bell. I have a very difficult time tolerating elitism.

- David

Monday, July 28, 2008

Most Astonishing Health Disaster of the 20th Century

Fear of the Invisible, How scared should we be of Viruses and Vaccines, HIV and AIDS?

Fear of the Invisible, How scared should we be of Viruses and Vaccines, HIV and AIDS?

I highly recommend this new book by Janine Roberts:

Product Description
This book takes its readers on a journey into the very heart of the
hunt for viruses - to the key experiments originally performed to
prove that these invisibly small particles are the cause of diseases
previously blamed on toxins or bacteria and into the latest research.
It sheds light on the extraordinary assumptions that underlay much of
this research - and on the vaccines that developed from this.

The author, an investigative journalist who has researched and
produced investigative films for the BBC, American and Australian
television, was asked by parents with children severely ill after
vaccination, to discover if the medical authorities were hiding
anything from them. She agreed, but had no idea how long this search
would take. She expected at best to uncover a small degree of

On the ensuing decade-long journey of discovery, she learnt it is not
just the added mercury that we have to worry about. She discovered
that the top government scientists admit to colleagues that vaccines
are contaminated with viruses from chickens, humans and monkeys, with
RNA and DNA fragments, with 'cellular degradation products', and
possibly 'oncogenes and prions.' They report alarmingly that it is
impossible to commercially purify vaccines. They express great
concerns, but the public is not told despite the possible consequences
for long-term public health.

A recent US court decision has linked autism with vaccine
contamination. The author cites her sources by name - and gives
references and Internet links where they are available. I She reveals
evidence that the World Health Organisation has discovered the MMR
vaccine is contaminated with chicken leukosis virus, but has decided
not to tell the public of this, and to continue to make the vaccine
with eggs from contaminated chickens. She reports US biowarfare
researchers tried to create new agents to destroy our immune systems -
and worked on a bacterium to make it a hospital superbug.

Did they manage to create HIV? A senior professor told her that the
vaccine program was so contaminated that HIV might well have spread
though it without any need for military intervention. She set out to
find the evidence to resolve this, and to learn how HIV apparently
spread so far and fast. She needed to know more about this virus so
went to the foundation research widely held today to have found HIV
and proved it caused AIDS.

She was then rocked to discover that this same research was
investigated for scientific fraud for a five year period by powerful
US scientific institutions and by Congress,. Why is this not widely
known? She found their reports and discovered they found major errors
in this research, some so serious that these made it impossible to
repeat these experiments and thus to verify them! She reveals the
evidence unearthed - reproducing key documents so the reader can
assess them for themselves.

This is explosive material. In the final part of this book the author
reports recent research that is revolutionising biology and offering
much hope for the future. These new developments shed new light on the
relationships between our cells and viruses. They are not necessarily
enemies. Readers may find these new developments radically change the
ideas they have held about viruses since childhood. This book has over
500 references and includes several documents unearthed under Freedom
of Information legislation. `It has a scientific glossary and is fully

Fear of the Invisible, How scared should we be of Viruses and Vaccines, HIV and AIDS?

RE:, HIV, Big Pharma and a Request


Today, July 28th, I received the email below from (

Normally, I get more of an auto-reply, but this time it came from what appears to be a real person... I think Mike and his team may actually be listening.

Keep contacting Mike Adams at if you want to see more about this topic of the HIV/AIDS scandal and fraud involving Big Pharma, the FDA and Politics.... It's a very tangled web indeed.

Perhaps Mike will have an interview with Clark Baker as well as finally report on this issue.

Let me be clear that the reason that I'm singling out Mike Adams and his service is because I have come to highly respect the work he is doing. I recommend to everyone and I have followed Mike's recommendations on supplementation and other health issues. I have forwarded and blogged many of the articles I have found at Mike Adams, The Health Ranger (, is a worthy role-model and a bit of a hero to me.

If Mike Adams follows up with this one there will be no doubt, for me, as to his sincere dedication to the truth about the cause of diseases and exposing the pharmaceutical companies along with the medical industry and the FDA for what they really are... Largely criminal organizations.

Thank You,
David Collins

PS: Don't forget to contact your favorite Health News sources and let them know we want this topic to be addressed out in the open.

"I began this investigation in May and have since farmed ALL of my other investigations to other investigators. I intend to remain engaged in this until the courts and/or legislature has ended this criminal enterprise.."

"After having investigated thousands of crimes and arrested hundreds of criminal gang members and other assorted predators, I know a criminal enterprise when I see one."

"HIV/AIDS makes Enron look like a neighborhood poker game."

"I have never written about anything more important. This story changed my life, and if you have the time and patience to understand what I have written, it may change yours as well.

If Americans, our courts, and our legislature permit the continued corruption of science and medicine by our pharmaceutical industry, I fear that the 232-year experiment we call “The United States of America” will have failed."

- Clark Baker

-------- Original Message --------

Subject:, HIV, Big Pharma and a Request
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:22:04 -0700
From: Brian Levario <>
To: <>

Dear Reader,

We are going to be speaking about this with Mike in the coming weeks. Thank you for your inquiry, and look to the website for any updates.

Natural News Customer Service

FDA, Or Federal Destruction Administration, Wrong On Peppers

Well, they did it again. The bureaucrats at the Food and Drug Administration, which should be re-named the Federal Destruction Administration, have embarked on yet another mission to wipe out an industry, and with it, thousands more jobs.

First, they diced the tomato industry under the guise of "science" by declaring that fruit to be the culprit behind the nationwide salmonella outbreak that sickened over 1,000 people in 42 states. They issued a list of certain tomatoes from states and countries that they said were safe to eat, and, conversely, warned against consuming other kinds grown in areas that were deemed harmful. The only problem was that the FDA had no idea - not a clue - as to where the salmonella originated and, even worse, what fruit or vegetable was the carrier. Tomatoes became the convenient scapegoat of the day.

Dr. David Acheson, the FDA's associate commissioner for Foods, arrogantly stated that "the science led us to believe strong association with tomatoes. We stand behind that science that set us on the tomato track to begin with." But he added that science "changes; it evolves, and we have to evolve with it."

Since the good doctor has a British accent, he must be right. After all, Americans always give more credibility to someone with an accent. Just look at all the British judges on our dancing and singing shows.

But this time, he's flat out wrong. Wrong in his assessment, wrong in his judgment, and wrong for his hubris.

The science wasn't wrong, and it didn't "evolve." It simply didn't prove anything. But the FDA jumped the gun anyway, so as to not look bad, and, in the process, wreaked destruction on thousands of livelihoods. But don't expect an apology or government compensation anytime soon. The FDA sees nothing wrong in what it did, and is continuing its slash-and-burn course.

Not finding a trace of salmonella on over 1,700 tomatoes tested, they shifted gears and decided to sear the pepper industry, specifically the growers of the serrano and jalapeno varieties. At first, this was just a whimsical guess masked as evolving science. But alas, a single pepper was found to have a strain of salmonella. So the devastation of the pepper industry is now justified in their eyes.

The problem, once again, is that their "discovery" proves absolutely nothing. The agency itself admits that the salmonella could have come from a number of sources, instead of from a pepper farm. Maybe it came from contaminated water at the washing station, or one of the shipping boxes. Or it touched another vegetable with salmonella. Given that there are so many variables involved, it is preposterous to throw blame on yet another industry without a much more thorough investigation showing conclusive results.

Even now, the FDA states that peppers as the source do not explain all of the cases, in the exact way that tomatoes didn't either. The salmonella may have just miraculously warped itself from one kind of produce to another. Way to cover your derriere.

The burning questions remain: After wiping out thousands of jobs and inflicting well over half a billion dollars damage to the tomato industry, with no proof that tomatoes were even involved, how can it do the same thing to the pepper industry? Why is no one calling them on these un-American scare-and-destroy tactics? And as a side-note, by ringing a false alarm yet again, the FDA is dangerously close to becoming the Boy Who Cried Wolf.

The FDA must be reigned in, and its "accuse first and look for facts later" tactics halted immediately. The era of McCarthyism is supposed to be over.

Chris Freind can be reached at

Podcast Available - Gallo’s Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show

Robert Scott Bell

"Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show"

You can listen to the podcast of the interview here

and an off air interview after the show here

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Vytorin's Cancer Link, Nuclear Vegetables and The End of HIV's AIDS Causation Illusion

Robert Scott Bell
Each week Robert Scott Bell empowers his listeners with healing principles that can aid in physical, emotional, mental, spiritual, economic and yes even political healing! Robert hosts the fastest two hours of healing information on radio, dealing with everyday health issues from the perspective of alternative/holistic health care. Robert Scott Bell tackles the tough issues and shows no fear when confronting government and corporate bullies who would stand in the way of health freedom. You will be amazed by the amount of information about healing that is kept secret from you and what you can do to learn more about it! Robert Scott Bell is a homeopathic practitioner with a passion for health and healing unmatched by anybody on radio. He personally overcame numerous chronic diseases using natural healing principles and has dedicated his life to revealing the healing power within all of us.

Radio broadcast on Sunday, July 27, 2008 from 1 PM to 3 PM EDT:
This has been quite a year so far. The government and its regulating minions have been forced to admit that mercury in your teeth (dental amalgams) may not be such a safe thing after all (despite the American Dental Association's denial). The FEDS were also forced to acknowledge a link between vaccination and autism. If we were to use the pharmaceutical PR techniques and language against them, we would call the ADA a bunch of mercury "denialists." Even more paradigm-crumbling is the "HIV=AIDS" activists attack on Clark Baker, a former L.A. cop, U.S. Marine and current private investigator, for his exposé on the AIDS industry. It turns out that this unbiased investigator may have stumbled onto the biggest biological blunder and subsequent criminal enterprise of the 20th and 21st centuries. Could it be that HIV never caused AIDS? Although I have been covering this story for years, now may be the time when the people are ready to look at Bob Gallo and his pharmaceutical followers and see that they are buck-naked. Can we tell Congress to recall the 48 billion they just appropriated for Africa now?

The Robert Scott Bell Show cherishes the principles that strengthen our understanding and practical application of freedom and healing. Where other talk shows leave off, the Robert Scott Bell Show is just getting started. Listen to the voice of health freedom and liberty for perspective this week Sunday, July 27, 2008 from 1 PM to 3 PM EDT. Just turn on your radio or internet stream at the appropriate time.

Hour One: Vytorin's Cancer Link and FDA's Salmonella Nuclear Stir Fry -- "Don't eat your tomatoes or peppers, they might have dangerous microbes on them" warns the FDA. In the meantime they approve deadly cancer-causing drugs for which they do not even know if there is any benefit. How far we have descended into a state of pharmaceutical fascism in this nation when we see all vegetation as potential bioterror weapons while government-approved deadly pills slide by as benevolent Bambi feed. Statin drugs and cholesterol metabolism blockers are sold as life saving medicines while, in reality, they serve as destroyers of life. If the purposefully incompetent FDA successfully convinces us that veggies are caloric death traps, they might be able to implement nuclear radiation fertilizer for all plant life. You think nuking food to kill microbes is a good thing? Only if you don't care about the nutritional content of what finds its way into your mouth. More solutions for the statin drug-deficiency delusions that plague the cardiovascular profession, coming right up. That's right, fear not the cholesterol... Empowering the nation and everyone in it to heal, only on the united States of health talk radio. Your calls at 1-800-449-8255. (Show topics subject to change based on breaking news and the whims of the host.)

Hour Two:
Robert Gallo's HIV Egg is Cracking
-- What if everything that you thought you knew about AIDS was wrong? Starting with Robert Gallo's 1984 gaffe with Margaret Heckler at the HHS press conference, the personification of HIV as a super-villain precipitated a new pharmaceutical war worth hundreds of billions of dollars. It also caused the deaths of thousands of "AIDS" victims who were corralled into AZT chemotherapy because of a false fear of a retrovirus. After the Semmelweis Society International (SSI) presented Peter Duesberg and Celia Farber the Clean Hands Award earlier this year, the controversy that erupted caused SSI to hire a P.I., Clark Baker, to investigate claims by AIDS activist groups that "anyone who questioned HIV as the cause of AIDS" is a criminal. Clark joins me to report his findings. Also, David Steele, a prominent Bay Area attorney chimes in on the issue after years of handling cases involving cancer and AIDS. I've covered this issue before, but not like this. Although HIV has never been proven to be deadly, the pharmaceutical treatment for it certainly has. Enough with this culture of death. It's time that the truth comes out. Thanks for tuning in where there's more healing in two hours than most shows have in a whole year! Your calls at 1-800-449-8255.

Saturday, July 26, 2008, HIV, Big Pharma and a Request

Dear Friends,

Mike Adams of is very active about exposing the FDA, Big Pharma and the Medical Industry for all the criminal activity that they engage in at the expense of people's health and their very lives. I subscribe to Mike's newsletter and I have learned much from reading his articles as well as the articles of those who are published on his site. However, he seems to choose to ignore the 'HIV equals AIDS' scandal for some reason. As, I suppose, do a lot a lot of high profile health and wellness promoters who are afraid for their reputations and livelihoods or just do not have the guts to truly stand up for this particular issue. Even this one seems to be too much for some of the health freedom heavy weights.

I realize that the environment has been created in which even questioning the dictate of 'HIV equals AIDS' is taboo. Many prominent Doctors, Scientist, University Professors and other learned people have lost their reputations and jobs by simply questioning HIV as being the cause of AIDS (this should raise red flags in itself - people should be able to question ANYTHING). People have been conditioned to respond to people who ask this question as if they had just sentenced millions of people to a horrible death when the exact opposite is true. The whole HIV equals AIDS paradigm has been created so that a few people and organizations can make Billions of dollars by convincing healthy people, with a bogus blood test, that they have a deadly incurable virus that will eventually kill them if they do not take an expensive "cocktail" of highly toxic drugs... Which causes side-effects that require further medications... Until you're dead. You know, the typical medical protocol. This has made the pharmaceutical and medical industries billions of dollars at the expense of millions of lives.

For most there is no question that AIDS exists, however the search for the true cause and treatment has been sidetracked by a few people whose ego's and lust for power and money have caused untold suffering and death by claiming to have found the answer and have presented it without any real proof. There have been a lot of suppressed studies that show AIDS is linked to malnutrition and exposure to toxins. From my research I've come to an understanding that AIDS is an issue of toxicology not virology.

This issue affects EVERYONE, but is particularly relevant to me because I have been affected by it personally. I was diagnosed as "HIV positive" 15 (fifteen) years ago. I was diagnosed with AIDS around a year ago. I did not question the medical orthodoxy on this until about a year ago. I do not recall that my AIDS diagnosis being what motivated me to look closer, as I was also questioning a lot of pharmaceutical issues at the time. I know that there are those who will accuse me of simply being in denial of my situation and desperately looking for a way out. The only thing I'm desperate about is getting the truth out about HIV and AIDS. I have already been accused of being irresponsible for taking my health into my own hands. However, I must point out that I have NEVER been extraordinarily ill during this entire time. The only reason I was diagnosed with AIDS is because my T-Cell count went below 200, which is one of the definitions of having AIDS as espoused by the CDC. (T-cells are a highly questionable way to gauge the health of one's immune system). And I have done (and I am still doing) more than a cursory research on this whole subject. I have always been willing to admit when I am wrong and I do not claim to understand everything that I have read but I have understood enough to know that I have been lied to directly and indirectly about my health and consequently almost poisoned to death.

I waited over seven years from the time I was "diagnosed" to consider taking any of the prescribed medications for HIV because my "numbers" were always healthy. It was during an extremely stressful time in my life that my numbers started looking "bad" (stress is known to cause havoc with blood tests) and I was persuaded to begin taking the drugs. It was only during the time that I did so that I experienced any "HIV" or "AIDS like" symptoms... Constant diarrhea, constant nausea, jaundice and lipodystrophy. I took these for a couple of years and then stopped and took a "med holiday" (which I is something I don't think they recommend anymore) under the advice of a doctor because my immune system was showing to be healthy. After stopping the "medications" my body went back to normal. A couple of years later I was urged to begin taking the drugs again and I reluctantly complied. After all, they told me I would soon be dead if I didn't. The side-effects were worse this time around and I stopped taking them on my own. I stopped taking ALL pharmaceutical drugs about a year ago and I am healthier than I've ever been.

I am supposed to be dead or at least on my way to being dead. I am not. I am healthier than most of the people I know who are "HIV negative". I do believe that if I had started taking meds when I was first diagnosed I would be dead now. I do believe that if I had continued taking the drugs after I had started I would be dying now. The "HIV Cocktail" they prescribe stops several very important functions required by the body to be healthy and to live. They actually destroy the immune system which is something they are suppose to stopping the HIV from doing! The drugs will cause you to have AIDS if you don't have it to begin with. You are not treated as a person who has a virus that must be stopped. You are treated as if you ARE a virus and you must die.... A slow horrible death caused by poisoning.

They do this to people on the basis of an "HIV test". No HIV test, whether it uses blood, urine or saliva, has ever been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the specific intended purpose of diagnosing infection with HIV.

In fact, there is a printed insert that comes in every HIV test kit which contains a disclaimer that the test cannot diagnose actual infection with HIV. Most doctors giving the test and most people taking the test never see these disclaimers.

Please contact Mike and ask him to stop ignoring this issue. has a very large readership and Mike Adams has earned a reputation for tackling the FDA and the medical cabal and related organizations because he claims that he does not profit from the sale of the products that he promotes (though I suspect he receives lots of free products, trips to manufacturing facilities, books, etc., which would add up to quite a bit of compensation).

I have written to Mr. Adams myself on a couple of occasions about the HIV equals AIDS lie and I know that others also have, but he continues to ignore this issue for some reason. But maybe if he gets a lot more requests to report on this issue he will wake up and listen and help bring this issue to light for many more people. He could help save a lot of lives by doing this. He claims to be interested in the TRUE CAUSE OF DISEASE, so let's get him to report on the lie about the true cause of AIDS.

I refer the following information sources to you and to Mr. Adams so that you (and hopefully Mr Adams as well as any other high profile people in the health and wellness industry) will see the overwhelming evidence for the case that HIV equaling AIDS is a huge fraud and scandal.

Contact Mike Adams:
Contact Dr. Mercola:
Contact anyone you know that can help spread the word.

Thank you,
David Collins

"I began this
investigation in May and have since farmed ALL of my other
investigations to other investigators. I intend to remain
engaged in this until the courts and/or legislature has ended
this criminal enterprise.."

"After having investigated
thousands of crimes and arrested hundreds of criminal gang
members and other assorted predators, I know a criminal enterprise
when I see one."

"HIV/AIDS makes Enron look like a neighborhood poker

"I have never written about anything more important.
This story changed my life, and if you have the time and patience
to understand what I have written, it may change yours as

If Americans, our courts, and our legislature permit the continued
corruption of science and medicine by our pharmaceutical industry,
I fear that the 232-year experiment we call “The United
States of America” will have failed."

- Clark Baker

HIV, AIDS & Gallo’s Egg - By Clark Baker


HIV=AIDS: Fact Or Fraud?
Deconstructing The Myth Of AIDS
The Other Side of AIDS

The Origins of AIDS TV Film


Does Hiv cause Aids?
Lots of scientists say ‘no.’ Read more.

The Perth Group

Treatment Information Group

Immunity Resource Foundation

Alberta Reappraising Aids Society

Peter Duesberg on AIDS

Rethinking AIDS

What is AIDS?


HEAL: Alternative Health
and AIDS information

Alive & Well

Living Without HIV Drugs

AIDS Myth Exposed

"You Bet Your Life"

HEAL Toronto

Friday, July 25, 2008

Gallo’s Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show

From: Robert Scott Bell
RE: "HIV, AIDS & Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker":

Clark Baker will be interviewed for a full hour this Sunday on the nationally syndicated Robert Scott Bell Show to discuss his investigative report. Please tune in if it is live in your area or you can listen to it live on the internet stream. You can find the link to it at

The interview will be live from 11am to noon PST. This will be a HUGE opportunity to broadcast this incredible report and information nationwide to over 74 radio markets nationwide and worldwide on the internet. You can also call in to talk to Clark and show your support for the work he is doing.

Tell your friends, your family and spread the news to everyone you know that Clark will be on the radio this Sunday dispelling the AIDS myth and exposing the crooks and liars.

This Sunday 7/27/08 at 11am PST
The Robert Scott Bell Show
on your local talk station or
via internet stream at

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Suzy Cohen's syndicated column SAVED!!


Suzy Press Photo.
A Real Live Pharmacist offering
Real Life Solutions
Scout of Angels...

You all did it! Thanks to your letters and call, my syndicated column will still be read by millions of folks down South. I am sending you all the biggest heartfelt hug possible, and all my gratitude. Some of the letters brought me to tears. We have a great deal of power together, don't we? If you have friends who never want to lose contact with me, suggest that they sign up for my newsletter, just in case this sort of thing happens again and we don't succeed! May good health shine upon you! Suzy Forward this email to a Friend

Can You Trust Chemotherapy to Cure Your Cancer?


Wednesday, July 23, 2008 by: Andreas Moritz (see all articles by this author)
| Key concepts: chemotherapy, cancer and colon cancer

(NaturalNews) Former White House press secretary Tony Snow died in July 2008 at the age of 53, following a series of chemotherapy treatments for colon cancer. In 2005, Snow had his colon removed and underwent six months of chemotherapy after being diagnosed with colon cancer. Two years later (2007), Snow underwent surgery to remove a growth in his abdominal area, near the site of the original cancer. "This is a very treatable condition," said Dr. Allyson Ocean, a gastrointestinal oncologist at Weill Cornell Medical College. "Many patients, because of the therapies we have, are able to work and live full lives with quality while they're being treated. Anyone who looks at this as a death sentence is wrong." But of course we now know, Dr. Ocean was dead wrong.

The media headlines proclaimed Snow died from colon cancer, although they knew he didn't have a colon anymore. Apparently, the malignant cancer had "returned" (from where?) and "spread" to the liver and elsewhere in his body. In actual fact, the colon surgery severely restricted his normal eliminative functions, thereby overburdening the liver and tissue fluids with toxic waste. The previous series of chemo-treatments inflamed and irreversibly damaged a large number of cells in his body, and also impaired his immune system -- a perfect recipe for growing new cancers. Now unable to heal the causes of the original cancer (in addition to the newly created ones), Snow's body developed new cancers in the liver and other parts of the body.

The mainstream media, of course, still insist Snow died from colon cancer, thus perpetuating the myth that it is only the cancer that kills people, not the treatment. Nobody seems to raise the important point that it is extremely difficult for a cancer patient to actually heal from this condition while being subjected to the systemic poisons of chemotherapy and deadly radiation. If you are bitten by a poisonous snake and don't get an antidote for it, isn't it likely that your body becomes overwhelmed by the poison and, therefore, cannot function anymore?

Before Tony Snow began his chemo-treatments for his second colon cancer, he still looked healthy and strong. But after a few weeks into his treatment, he started to develop a coarse voice, looked frail, turned gray and lost his hair. Did the cancer do all this to him? Certainly not. Cancer doesn't do such a thing, but chemical poisoning does. He actually looked more ill than someone who has been bitten by a poisonous snake.

Does the mainstream media ever report about the overwhelming scientific evidence that shows chemotherapy has zero benefits in the five-year survival rate of colon cancer patients? Or how many oncologists stand up for their cancer patients and protect them against chemotherapy treatment which they very well know can cause them to die far more quickly than if they received no treatment at all? Can you trustingly place your life into their hands when you know that most of them would not even consider chemotherapy for themselves if they were diagnosed with cancer? What do they know that you don't? The news is spreading fast that in the United States physician-caused fatalities now exceed 750,000 each year. Perhaps, many doctors no longer trust in what they practice, for good reasons.

"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy... Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors... Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it." - Alan Levin, M.D.

An investigation by the Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Australia, into the contribution of chemotherapy to 5-year survival in 22 major adult malignancies, showed startling results: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA." [Royal North Shore Hospital Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2005 Jun;17(4):294.]

The research covered data from the Cancer Registry in Australia and the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results in the USA for the year 1998. The current 5-year relative adult survival rate for cancer in Australia is over 60%, and no less than that in the USA. By comparison, a mere 2.3% contribution of chemotherapy to cancer survival does not justify the massive expense involved and the tremendous suffering patients experience because of severe, toxic side effects resulting from this treatment. With a meager success rate of 2.3%, selling chemotherapy as a medical treatment (instead of a scam), is one of the greatest fraudulent acts ever committed. The average chemotherapy earns the medical establishment a whopping $300,000 to $1,000,000 each year, and has so far earned those who promote this pseudo-medication (poison) over 1 trillion dollars. It's no surprise that the medical establishment tries to keep this scam alive for as long as possible.

In 1990, the highly respected German epidemiologist, Dr. Ulrich Abel from the Tumor Clinic of the University of Heidelberg, conducted the most comprehensive investigation of every major clinical study on chemotherapy drugs ever done. Abel contacted 350 medical centers and asked them to send him anything they had ever published on chemotherapy. He also reviewed and analyzed thousands of scientific articles published in the most prestigious medical journals. It took Abel several years to collect and evaluate the data. Abel's epidemiological study, which was published on August 10, 1991 in The Lancet, should have alerted every doctor and cancer patient about the risks of one of the most common treatments used for cancer and other diseases. In his paper, Abel came to the conclusion that the overall success rate of chemotherapy was "appalling." According to this report, there was no scientific evidence available in any existing study to show that chemotherapy can "extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering from the most common organic cancers."

Abel points out that chemotherapy rarely improves the quality of life. He describes chemotherapy as "a scientific wasteland" and states that even though there is no scientific evidence that chemotherapy works, neither doctor nor patient is willing to give up on it. The mainstream media has never reported on this hugely important study, which is hardly surprising, given the enormous vested interests of the groups that sponsor the media, that is, the pharmaceutical companies. A recent search turned up exactly zero reviews of Abel's work in American journals, even though it was published in 1990. I believe this is not because his work was unimportant -- but because it is irrefutable.

The truth of the matter would be far too costly for the pharmaceutical industry to bear, thus making it unacceptable. If the mass media reported the truth that medical drugs, including chemotherapy drugs, are used to practically commit genocide in the U.S. and the world, their best sponsors (the pharmaceutical companies) would have to withdraw their misleading advertisements from the television media, radio stations, magazines, and newspapers. But neither group wants to go bankrupt.

Many doctors go as far as prescribing chemotherapy drugs to patients for malignancies that are far too advanced for surgery, with the full knowledge that there are no benefits at all. Yet they claim chemotherapy to be an effective cancer treatment, and their unsuspecting patients believe that "effective" equals "cure." The doctors, of course, refer to the FDA's definition of an "effective" drug, one which achieves a 50% or more reduction in tumor size for 28 days. They neglect to tell their patients that there is no correlation whatsoever between shrinking tumors for 28 days and curing the cancer or extending life. Temporary tumor shrinkage through chemotherapy has never been shown to cure cancer or to extend life. In other words, you can live with an untreated tumor for just as long as you would with one that has been shrunken or been eliminated by chemotherapy (or radiation).

Chemotherapy has never been shown to have curative effects for cancer. By contrast, the body can still cure itself, which it actually tries to do by developing cancer. Cancer is more a healing response than it is a disease. The "disease" is the body's attempt to cure itself of an existing imbalance. And sometimes, this healing response continues even if a person is subjected to chemotherapy (and/or radiation). Unfortunately, as the previously mentioned research has demonstrated, the chances for a real cure are greatly reduced when patients are treated with chemotherapy drugs.

The side effects of the treatment can be horrendous and heartbreaking for both patients and their loved ones, all in the name of trustworthy medical treatment. Although the drug treatment comes with the promise to improve the patient's quality of life, it is just common sense that a drug that makes them throw up and lose their hair, while wrecking their immune system, is doing the exact opposite. Chemo-therapy can give the patient life-threatening mouth sores. It attacks the immune system by destroying billions of immune cells (white blood cells). Its deadly poisons inflame every part of the body. The drugs can slough off the entire lining of their intestines. The most common side effect experienced among chemo patients is their complete lack of energy. The new additional drugs now given to many chemo patients may prevent the patient from noticing some of the side effects, but they hardly reduce the immensely destructive and suppressive effect of the chemotherapy itself. Remember, the reason chemotherapy can shrink some tumors is because it causes massive destruction in the body.

If you have cancer, you may think that feeling tired is just part of the disease. This rarely is the case. Feeling unusually tired is more likely due to anemia, a common side effect of most chemotherapy drugs. Chemo drugs can dramatically decrease your red blood cell levels, and this reduces oxygen availability to the 60-100 trillion cells of your body. You can literally feel the energy being zapped from every cell of your body -- a physical death without dying. Chemo-caused fatigue has a negative impact on day-to-day activities in 89% of all patients. With no energy, there can be no joy and no hope, and all bodily functions become subdued.

One long-term side effect is that these patients' bodies can no longer respond to nutritional or immune-strengthening approaches to cancerous tumors. All of this may explain why cancer patients who do not receive any treatment at all, have an up to four times higher remission rate than those who receive treatment. The sad thing is that chemotherapy does not cure 96% to 98% of all cancers anyway. Conclusive evidence (for the majority of cancers) that chemotherapy has any positive influence on survival or quality of life does not exist.

To promote chemotherapy as a treatment for cancer is misleading, to say the least. By permanently damaging the body's immune system and other important parts, chemo-therapy has become a leading cause of treatment-caused diseases such as heart disease, liver disease, intestinal diseases, diseases of the immune system, infections, brain diseases, pain disorders, and rapid aging.

Before committing themselves to being poisoned, cancer patients need to question their doctors and ask them to produce the research or evidence that shrinking a tumor actually translates to any increase in survival. If they tell you that chemotherapy is your best chance of surviving, you will know they are lying or are simply misinformed. As Abel's research clearly demonstrated, there is no such evidence anywhere to be found in the medical literature. Subjecting patients to chemotherapy robs them of a fair chance of finding or responding to a real cure and deserves criminal prosecution.

Andreas Moritz's book, Cancer is not a Disease - It's a Survival Mechanism, explains the root causes of cancer and how to eliminate them for good. Available through ( or ( .

About the author

Andreas Moritz is a medical intuitive; a practitioner of Ayurveda, iridology, shiatsu, and vibrational medicine; a writer; and an artist. He is the author of The Amazing Liver and Gallbladder Flush, Timeless Secrets of Health and Rejuvenation, Lifting the Veil of Duality, Cancer Is Not a Disease, It's Time to Come Alive, Heart Disease No More, Diabetes No More, Simple Steps to Total Health, Diabetes -- No More, Ending the AIDS Myth and Heal Yourself with Sunlight. For more information, visit the author's website (

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Pharmacist Suzy Cohen Discusses Astaxanthin

Astaxanthin is something everyone should look into. Listen to Pharmacist Suzy Cohen discuss...

HIV, AIDS & Gallo’s Egg - Clark Baker

HIV, AIDS & Gallo's Egg

by Cark Baker

Last June, I posted this report about US hospitals and how many rely on fraud, preventable injuries and infections to patients to compensate for losses due to our government's insistence that private hospitals treat and care for uninsured and underinsured citizens, indigents, and illegal aliens.

I learned how hospitals destroy good physicians and how predatory hospital chains like Tenet, Kaiser Permanente, and Adventist pressure local physicians already in successful private practice to join their groups. Those who refuse are targeted for sham peer review by corporate administrators and MDs who accuse non-compliant physicians as dangerous, incompetent, or disruptive. While a few tenacious victims expend their life savings to preserve their clinical privileges, others aren't so lucky. Faced with the malicious and devastating loss of their medical careers, many take their own lives; which is what the health care corporations prefer anyway. To them, it's only business – nothing personal.

I was never impressed by concerns about "the evils of big pharma." I assumed that drugs are expensive because of the R & D that goes into finding cures for disease. Until now, I never imagined that some of those same drug companies would support junk science to fund researchers who would then produce expensive drugs that cause illness and disease around the world; or support junk legislation that would force healthy mothers and their children to take drugs that kill (under the threatened loss of child custody), and then use their subsequent sickness and mortality as evidence that a non-existent disease actually exists.

Such a scheme would have made Machiavelli weep with joy.

A New Investigation

I was not concerned about "big pharma" until my visit to Washington DC last May. I was there to meet with members of Semmelweis Society International (SSI). This is an impressive group of medical professionals – physicians, nurses, surgeons, medical and law school professors, and former CEOs of health care corporations. Because of my own experience with retaliation and my ongoing interest in US healthcare and sham peer review, I was interested to hear their stories directly from them.

I accompanied Gil Mileikowsky, MD, the OB/GYN who first explained sham peer to me in 2006. I spent five days with the members – all dedicated men and women who care deeply about the political corruption of healthcare and who risked their own careers to report fraud or abuse within the healthcare system. I recorded and edited their testimony, and posted this video after members testified before the US Congress and Senate. I was also honored to testify regarding my experience as an LAPD whistleblower.

Two recipients of the Semmelweis "Clean Hands Award" were reporter Celia Farber and molecular biologist Peter Duesberg, PhD. I had not heard of them before and knew nothing of their relationship to a little known controversy about HIV and AIDS.

After 28 years as an investigator, I consider myself pretty skeptical about things until I see proof. Most of my work today is pro bono, so I can pick and choose who I assist. Witnesses are expected to lie, but if I discover that a client has misrepresented facts or lied to me, I will usually drop the case. I'm fortunate to have the time, energy, and resources to help good people get out of undeservedly bad predicaments. Not all lawyers are like Mike Nifong or David Sotelo, and not all private investigators work like Anthony Pellicano. Without unbiased credibility, investigators are nothing more than a liability to their clients.

As various members interacted with Farber and Duesberg, I learned that the HIV/AIDS issue had not been entirely resolved. Like Dr. Mileikowsky's story about sham peer review, this sounded equally unbelievable.

When I returned to Los Angeles, several former members began to question the wisdom of presenting the awards to Farber and Duesberg. In response, SSI President (and neurosurgeon) Roland Chalifoux issued this press release to explain the rationale of the awards. But when two dissenters persisted, Dr. Chalifoux asked me to conduct an independent investigation of Ms. Farber and Prof. Duesberg, citing my investigative experience, independence, and almost complete lack of knowledge about HIV and AIDS.

I accepted the case.

Although I didn't expect it at first, I was warned that I should expect attacks from the "other side." I wasn't sure what they meant but kept it in the back of my mind. It didn't take me long to find out for myself.

When word got out that I had begun my investigation, several ex-SSI members told me that Duesberg and Farber were dangerous and "not worth my time" to investigate. Having met both in Washington, I found nothing dangerous about the reporter or microbiologist.

Two dissenters, James Murtagh, MD and Kevin Kuritzky, were friendly to me at first and "appealed to my better judgment." Their friendly pressure intrigued me and I began my investigation by checking into their allegations.

Both essentially charged that Duesberg and Farber were liars and that both were responsible for millions of HIV deaths in Africa. I wasn't as troubled by their allegations as I was by their insistence that I stop my investigation. It seemed incongruous that the individuals who alleged genocide would also pressure me to not investigate their own allegations.

As both Murtagh and Kuritzky increased their hostility, the more interesting the case became.

From: Kevin Kuritzky []
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 9:50 PM
To: Celia Farber
Cc: SSI Membership
Subject: Re: Official Nominations

Celia - why don't you take your parasitic, attention-whore behavior elsewhere, to a place where people actually care.

You have been exposed to most of Semmelweis, and South Africa doesn't want your uneducated "faux-journalistic" crap opinions either. The entire world have basically discredited you countless times, and all the attachments I have sent verifies this. Go back to doing what you appear to know best, which is to .

Your anecdotal stinking pile of bulls*** is only trumped by the real science of people who are actually qualified to talk about this, not someone like you who .

Your false, damaging, and absurd views on HIV are not welcome in the medical community. Now I suggest you exit before you are exposed even further into the pit that you continue to dig.

It was hard to imagine that Kuritzky had once been accepted to the Emory School of Medicine and even more bizarre that his collaborator, Dr. Murtagh, would permit such an attack. Fifteen minutes later, Murtagh replied to Kuritzky:

From: Jim Murtagh []
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 10:05 PM
To: celiafarber;
:Fwd: Official Nominations

Dear Kevin,

I asked you to be kind to Ms. Farber because she is obviously ill. Her has distorted her judgment. We are dealing with very sad pathology in the AIDS denialists. What I really want to know is who wrote the SSI press releases? Who put Gil up to this? Obviously, Gil and Roland did not cook this up themselves.

It is sad that Farber did not respond to a single one of your well-documented points. I believe the entire SSI (and ex-SSI members) should be proud of the factual manner in which Kevin has investigated this affair.

Ms. Farber again resorts to made up facts, and ignores the 5,000 scientists who demonstrated that Koch's postulates have been fulfilled.

Kevin, you documented 12 double blind studies. Your research puts any doubt to rest. HIV causes AIDS. This is as certain as the earth is round, and that the moon is not made of green cheese.

At the time, I did not know that Murtagh and Kuritzky were being supported by pharmaceutically funded operatives from South Africa, Cornell University, and the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

It got worse.

On June 19th, I became a victim of their attacks just as I had been warned. Kuritzky initiated a "spam attack" against my name and professional email account and phones, generating thousands of unwanted spam messages and phone calls that offered everything from gay porn to paid vacations. Because I was prepared, I was able to positively identify the source of the attack by matching Kuritzky's IP address used before and after the attacks as the same address used to generate the attack. I eventually filed a crime report with the LAPD and continue to prepare a criminal and civil case against both.

As of last week, I completed and delivered my report to SSI and will now post it in its entirety below. If you want to understand what I now accept as the most significant criminal conspiracy I have ever imagined, get your coffee and strap on your seatbelt.

The investigation I call Gallo's Egg took me from America's "War on Cancer" (1971-1981) to the early history of HIV and AIDS. It reaches from the cities of West Hollywood and San Francisco to the continents of Africa, Asia, and Australia. It led me to the steps of the National Institutes of Health, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and some of America's most prestigious universities and research centers. It involves hundreds of billions of dollars of misdirected tax-supported funding and some of the most financially successful pharmaceutical companies in the world.

I have never written about anything more important. This story changed my life, and if you have the time and patience to understand what I have written, it may change yours as well.

If Americans, our courts, and our legislature permit the continued corruption of science and medicine by our pharmaceutical industry, I fear that the 232-year experiment we call "The United States of America" will have failed.


Gallo's Egg

On May 13, 2008, Semmelweis Society International (SSI) presented the Semmelweis "Clean Hands" Award to Professor Peter Duesberg and Investigative Journalist Celia Farber.

The awards were not presented as an endorsement of Prof. Duesberg's scientific conclusions. Indeed, SSI members disagree about many topics related to science, medicine, and politics. They are not unified by one single ideology, but by their commitment to those who oppose the influence of politics that corrupt science, research, and medicine.

Professor Peter Duesberg, PhD

Prof. Duesberg began his award-winning career in cancer research in 1963. Funded by major grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH), Dr. Duesberg isolated the first cancer gene in 1970, and mapped the genetic structure of retroviruses – a class of viruses that does not kill cells, but were thought to possibly cause cancer. In 1986, Prof. Duesberg was voted into the most respected scientific body in the United States, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

One year later, Prof. Duesberg described the flaws in the HIV hypothesis of AIDS causation. Although formal screenings are not required by Academy members, the NAS published Prof. Duesberg's paper after an unprecedented six separate peer reviews. After 20 years, Prof. Duesberg's paper remains unanswered.

Prior to these publications, Dr. Robert Gallo, the cancer virologist who claimed HIV caused AIDS in 1984 described Duesberg as the scientist "who knew more about retroviruses than any man alive."

At the time of his endorsement of Duesberg, Gallo headed the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Although Gallo's cancer and leukemia research was fraught with controversy, he still enjoyed significant influence in the distribution of research funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Once Dr. Duesberg questioned Gallo's hypothesis that HIV (alone) caused AIDS, all his proposals for research funding were suddenly rejected. Before raising questions about the role of HIV in AIDS causation, Duesberg's grant applications were never denied.

When reporter Celia Farber reported on Duesberg and the controversy over HIV (1988), the NIH barred her from further contact with their scientists and labeled her a "threat to public health." Despite being under constant attack from the HIV/AIDS industry since then, Farber continued to probe the subject in her writings over the years.

Retaliation against publications and journalists who report on scientific challenges to the HIV hypothesis is not new. The gay publications New York Native and Christopher Street were shuttered as a result of the ACT UP boycotts.

Celia Farber

When Farber published her 15-page exposé in Harper's on the unethical practices and patient deaths involved in the experimental AIDS drug trials in 2006, the retaliation was immediate.

Instead of addressing the disturbing content, or the inconsistencies of Dr. Gallo's AIDS research, pharmaceutical industry-sponsored AIDS activists and researchers accusing Farber of having made 56 errors, and urged the global media and AIDS communities to discredit her, the article, and Harper's, which they did (NY Times, The Nation, CJR, Poynter, Gay City News, The Advocate, The Body, Act Up). The document was posted by the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) in South Africa, where they are not required to identify their top 14 international "core donors". The non-profit group, Rethinking AIDS, later published a rebuttal to their attack on Farber, which proved there were no errors in the Harper's article. Farber's most prominent critics, including Gallo, refuse to respond.

Harper's and Farber stood accused of "AIDS denialism" and drawing negative attention to a "life-saving drug" Nevirapine, which had just been financed for distribution to more than a dozen developing nations. Their protest was consistent with their demands for increased distribution of lower-priced AZT during the 1980s.

In the heat of the attacks, members of Harper's staff also received threats. The authors of the attack manifesto demanded 1) an apology, 2) a condemnation of Farber, 3) Harper's surrender of pages to an article extolling the benefits of the drug in the next issue, same length, and the editor's resignations. They even demanded to bring their own fact checkers. Harper's yielded to none of the threats, conceded no errors, and continues to stand by the article to this day.

One of the signatories of the attack document against Farber was Richard Jefferys of New York's Treatment Action Group (TAG), one of many AIDS "activist" groups that are funded by the pharmaceutical industry.

In May 2008, Jefferys led the campaign to antagonize members of both the Semmelweis Society (SSI) and the No Fear Coalition over the Farber/Duesberg awards. In seeking to get the awards rescinded, Jefferys disseminated falsehoods about Farber's journalistic record (which this investigator examined) and failed to reveal that the maker of the drug Farber exposed was TAG's third largest donor. As the coordinator of TAG's central donor program, Jefferys' job was to coordinate "global activist/scientist response" against Farber and her article in Harper's: In short, Harpers paid Farber to investigate, and Boehringer Ingelheim paid Jeffreys to retaliate.

As a result of the false allegations, Farber did not receive another journalism assignment for more than two years. Only one source later reported that an independent panel of non-orthodox scientists found Farber's article, after a four month review process, to be error free.

Although his recent cancer theory has earned him newfound respect in scientific circles and media (Scientific American 2004, 2007, Discover 2008), Prof. Duesberg remains cut off from all NIH funding, and commutes to Germany to conduct his scientific work. While Prof. Duesberg and other scientists still doubt that HIV kills cells, their questions are even more troubling when we consider the coordinated personal attacks used by Gallo and a core group of collaborators against those who ask legitimate questions about Dr. Gallo's questionable scientific record:

In 1975, Gallo and Weiss stated that they had isolated a human leukemia virus, HL23 virus, but this was shown later to have resulted from laboratory contamination by three primate retroviruses. In 1980 Gallo claimed to have isolated a human T-cell leukemia virus (HTLV), but did not present positive evidence that this was a human virus. During 1983-4, Gallo and his associates published several papers asserting that the human leukemia virus, HTLV-1, was the agent involved in the development of AIDS. This was eventually disproven but meanwhile the attention of many scientists was misdirected, wasting time and resources that could have been put to far better use…

Human retroviruses in leukaemia and AIDS (p. 18)
Professor Abraham Karpas
Cambridge University

After years of questions about fraud and questionable research, Dr. Gallo left NCI to open Baltimore's Institute of Human Virology. Professor Duesberg still teaches at the University of California, Berkeley.

A quick summary of the origin of the HIV controversy:

  1. Dr. Duesberg identified and mapped retroviruses,
  2. Experts determined that retroviruses do not kill cells,
  3. Dr. Gallo calls Duesberg the world's top retrovirus expert,
  4. Dr. Gallo proclaims that the HIV (retrovirus) causes AIDS (by killing white blood cells),
  5. Dr. Duesberg reminds Gallo that retroviruses don't harm cells, and;
  6. Dr. Gallo has never proven that HIV exists, attacks cells, or causes AIDS.

History of Scientific Retaliation

Because the father of the scientific method was born 1000 years ago in the Middle East, the political pressures of his religion prevented humanity from taking full advantage of the promise of science. Ibn al Haytham and Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis were both judged insane not because they were wrong, but because their ideas threatened contemporary political forces.

Prof. Duesberg and Ms. Farber aren't alone. Economist Ben Stein reported others whose scientific inquiries are now threatened, interrupted, or corrupted by political influence. This influence results in the loss of research grants or, as in the case of Ms. Farber, industry insiders who blacklisted her in the media. In hospitals, these influences kill thousands of patients annually.

When the NAS published Prof. Duesberg's 1988 paper, Gallo and company scattered like debutants from a stentorian fart. Anthony Fauci refused comment. Maxine Singer said she was still reading earlier issues. Saying that he hadn't "heard a single scientist discuss it for a second," Gallo admitted that a copy was on his desk, but hadn't read it.

Although he vowed to respond, neither Gallo nor any of his defenders ever published a rebuttal of Duesberg's paper (or the 196 peer citations that supported it) in any peer-reviewed publication.

Instead, Gallo's defenders created the specter of AIDS-Denialists and Denialism, epithets designed to marginalize those who questioned Gallo's opinions as somehow denying the existence of AIDS itself. Because Gallo skeptics never questioned the existence of AIDS, this allegation is false. The fact that malnutrition, septic water, disease, environmental conditions, irresponsible drug use and self-destructive behavior can degrade a body's ability to protect itself from infection and cause death is undeniable. What is in question is Gallo's scientifically unsupported assertions that retroviruses cause leukemia, cancer, and AIDS.

When used around casual observers, the denialist/denialism epithet dehumanizes Gallo skeptics as flat-earthers, ufologists, Klansmen, Eugenicists, racists, homophobes, and other socially unacceptable groups. Because most people fear the stigma that comes with those associations – and are socially, politically, and professionally unprepared to defend themselves against this slur, they politely scatter and change the subject like Gallo's debutants.

The Storm

Months after Ms. Farber published her 2006 Harper's exposé, AIDS industry activists held this conference where those who offended the official HIV/AIDS "Party Line" were methodically and unrelentingly attacked as denialists.

Co-moderated by TAG operative Daniel Kuritzkes, MD, the 2006 HIV Science and Responsible Journalism Conference asked invited journalists "if balance was always appropriate when the evidence backs one side." These academic "hit men" openly and unapologetically detailed how and why these attacks shall be executed.

A paid consultant to more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies, Dr. Kuritzkes warned journalists that denialists like Peter Duesberg still work in universities and urged that they be denied access to students and reported to authorities whenever possible.

Kuritzkes told his audience:

"If this happens in your neighborhood ask the university authorities why they allow this and then write about it."

WSJ reporter Marilyn Chase warned reporters not to unintentionally "exalt the position of denialists by making them seem like just some sort of independent intellectual contrarian whose views really should be heeded."

Sitting in the audience, research scientist Ella DeCann complained that "science is full of laboratory politics," and asked the panel:

"Do you understand that AIDS research is actually tied to technology, rather than to science?"

Panelist John P. Moore, PhD quickly rejected her assertion. Although he regularly identifies himself as a professor of microbiology and immunology at Cornell University, Moore rarely mentions the $400 million annual funding that Cornell receives for research from taxpayers and HIV drug makers that include Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Trimeris, or GlaxoSmithKline. Bristol Myers Squibb alone acknowledges more than $100 million in research funding. With billions of dollars in research grants at stake, it's understandable why Dr. Moore and America's most prestigious universities are reluctant to offend the pharmaceutical companies that keep their prestigious research laboratories open. Rather than present Gallo's promised proof that HIV exists, kills cells, and causes AIDS, Dr. Moore attacks with rhetoric. A few examples:

A few months later, Dr. Moore wrote this email to another Gallo skeptic:

From: John P. Moore, PhD>
To: Michael Geiger
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2007 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: Shame on you JP!

Thanks Geiger! What you sent contains useful information we can use against you people! And we will!

"Dan" has it exactly right when he says:

If they are able to "justify" their actions, it's most likely because they simply see this as WAR. War against the "denialists". Nothing more.

When you're in a war, there are no rules.

This IS a war, there ARE no rules, and we WILL crush you, one at a time, completely and utterly (at least the more influential ones; foot-soldiers like you aren't worth bothering with). John (emphasis added)

Although Moore boldly threatens to "crush" those who question the role of HIV in AIDS, he avoids all invitations to engage in public debate on the HIV hypothesis of AIDS.

Because AIDS is mostly confined to its initial risk groups in America (gay men and drug users), most Americans have been too busy to concern themselves with the issue or the storm of politics and retaliation that continues to mute this largely unnoticed international debate. Most Americans feel unaffected, but our general complacency permitted fundamental changes in the direction and progress of higher-priority medical research. The redistribution of hundreds of billions of research dollars based upon Dr. Gallo's still unproven claims continues to the detriment of millions of Americans and people around the world.

After the Semmelweis Society International (SSI) presented awards to Duesberg and Farber last May, the retaliatory forces that curtailed all funding for Prof. Duesberg's award-winning cancer research and attacked Ms. Farber's reporting were suddenly brought to bear against SSI and its members (including this investigator). If not for the courage of the SSI membership and the support of hundreds of award-winning scientists and researchers, SSI and the awards would have evaporated. For their membership, science and medicine must repudiate all forms of political influence, regardless of the political risks involved.

In the spirit of freedom and science, SSI commissioned this report to respond to questions and arguments regarding Professor Duesberg's unanswered questions of Dr. Gallo's 1984 HIV hypothesis. As an independent investigator who could not be influenced by the threats or attacks made against vulnerable SSI members and others; and as someone who had never heard of Duesberg, Gallo, Farber, or AIDS Denialism before May 2008, SSI believed that this investigator had the unbiased and proven investigative experience necessary to examine both sides of the controversy. For his efforts, this investigator was not compensated.

One of the more printable attack letters to SSI was from former Emory medical student Kevin D. Kuritzky, who wrote:

It is my understanding that Semmelweis presented Dr. Duesberg with an award, seemingly on behalf of the group. It is not disputed that Dr. Duesberg is a controversial figure. However, I have had personal experiences with his material and his theories. I have read his works, studied them, and frankly, I am sickened.

I am sickened because… I was born in a nation, South Africa that is ravaged by HIV/AIDS. Dr. Duesberg was used as a pawn of the government to impede providing antiretroviral medicines to the needy. Dr. Duesberg has provided no science behind his theories, and he, as a virologist, allowed himself to be complicit to murder by the tens of thousands, in essence to sell his notoriety.

Investigator's Response:

South Africa is not "ravaged by HIV/AIDS." In 2001, the South African Government reported 9,479 deaths due to "HIV Disease" out of a population of 44.8 million. This represented only 3.16% of all deaths in the country and only two-one hundredths of one percent (0.02 %) of South Africa's total population.

(More African mortality info here)

Kuritzky's reference to "antiretroviral medicines" also implies an Orwellian use of language. The primary "medicine" is AZT, which was designed as a highly toxic cancer chemotherapy in the 1960s. It's hard to imagine why anyone in America or South Africa would want to deliver toxic chemotherapies to expectant mothers and villagers who already suffer from poverty, malnutrition, and septic water.

In this 2008 study, 320 Tanzanian patients were placed on "antiretroviral therapy" (ART) between October 2003 and November 2006. Most (223) were women, some as young as 15. The majority were between 25 and 34 years of age. Most were severely malnourished, had thrombocytopenia and varying degrees of anemia.

  • Overall, 95 patients died within 11 months, 59 within three months of starting the drug regimens.
  • One year mortality was estimated as high as 46.8% in those who were severely malnourished. Other studies confirmed that severe malnutrition is directly related to the mortality of HIV+ African patients "even after the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy…"
  • One of the authors explained that the study's weakness is that mortality might be underestimated because so many were lost to follow up and probably died at home.

  • Moreover, the main published study on the side effects of "antiretroviral medicines" is alarming.

    Ronald B Reisler M.D., M.P.H. did a five-year review (1996-2001) of about 3000 HIV/AIDS patients who took the anti-retroviral cocktails. He found that:

    • 332 patients suffered an "AIDS" event, meaning some purported manifestation of the underlying disease, however;
    • 675 patients suffered a "Grade 4″ event, meaning a life-threatening illness was attributed to the drugs, not the virus. The most common of these side-effects were:
      1. Liver damage
      2. Neutropenia (white blood cell loss)
      3. Anemia (red blood cell loss)
      4. Cardiovascular, including heart attacks
      5. Pancreatitis
      6. Psychiatric disorders
      7. Kidney problems
      8. Thrombocytopenia
      9. Hemorrhage

    In sum, twice as many AIDS patients fell ill from the drugs than from AIDS – which is exactly what Dr. Duesberg predicted would happen in the late 1980s.

    Kevin Kuritzky:

    Dr. Duesberg lacks any courage to back up his claims

    Investigator's Response:

    Dr. Duesberg has published numerous papers in the peer-reviewed literature to back up his claims, much to the detriment of his career. A Google-Scholar search reveals over 200 of his peer-reviewed papers. On the other hand, Mr. Kuritzky's claims have been posted on dozens of pharmaceutically-funded activist websites, including AIDS Truth, which was created in direct response to the perceived threat of the consequences of Farber's 2006 Harper's article. Although technically a "non-profit," AIDS Truth is operated by "team members" who are funded directly or indirectly by the pharmaceutical industry.

    Kevin Kuritzky:

    When I was in college, Dr. Duesberg gave a lecture. He was unprofessional and was offered the opportunity to prove his "theory." He lacked the fortitude to demonstrate his true commitment to the pseudo-science he preaches, and backed away like a coward. If he truly believes what he espouses, he should have the guts to inject himself with HIV to prove his point about "poppers" etc being the real culprits of AIDS.

    But unlike Dr. Jaworski who stood up for what he believed in with regards to peptic ulcer disease, Dr. Duesberg was a coward. When I was involved in HIV research as an undergraduate, I told Dr. Duesberg personally that this lack of desire to "prove" his point calls into question his very belief in the pseudotheory, and makes one wonder whether his whole career is based on a notoriety desire.

    Investigator's Response:

    As the tone of the "former medical student" grew increasingly hostile, this investigator noted consistencies between Kuritzky's attacks, and those routinely repeated by TAG surrogates John P. Moore PhD, Daniel Kuritzkes MD, and Richard Jefferys.

    After a brief examination, this investigator discovered that Kuritzky was expelled from Emory Medical School after numerous allegations of dishonesty, unprofessional, and unethical conduct. Regardless of his past (and consistent with garden-variety TAG attacks), Kuritzky offers no proof; and since Emory Medical School is located three time zones east of UC Berkeley, his anecdote is doubtful.

    Regarding the allegation of cowardice: Prof. Duesberg has offered several times (example) to inject himself with HIV if 1) only the exact terms for success or failure could be offered by his detractors, and 2) the experiment could be scientifically conclusive.

    In 1984, the theorized HIV/AIDS "HIV latency period" (from infection to illness) was said to be from six months to a year. Today, it is accepted that there are varying categories of "long term non-progressors" (LTNP) or "elite controllers", who take decades to progress to AIDS, if at all. In some studies the latency period has been stretched as high as 30 years or more (2007), although the drug industry and its activists attribute this to new antiviral drugs. This means that if Prof. Duesberg was injected with the "HIV retrovirus" in a controlled study today, he could die sometime after reaching his 104th birthday.

    After twenty years, Dr. Gallo and supporters like Dr. Moore continue to refuse to provide Dr. Gallo's promised rebuttal to Prof. Duesberg's PNAS paper. Instead, they have declared:

    We will not (e)ngage in any public or private debate with AIDS denialists or respond to requests from journalists who overtly support AIDS denialist causes.

    In this investigator's experience, no other science is defended with epithets and refusals to disclose. After publishing millions of pages of research based upon Dr. Gallo's hypothesis, why would Dr. Moore refuse to present Dr. Gallo's original proof unless it does not exist?

    Kevin Kuritzky:

    Dr. Duesberg has indirectly killed many human beings through his complicity in South Africa's limits on antiretroviral medications given to pregnant women. The science is proven that vertical transmission is greatly reduced here. I am not sure if Semmelweis is aware that Dr. Duesberg was essentially finally run out of the country (South Africa) as a murderer, and I personally don't disagree with this claim as I am intimately familiar with Dr. Duesberg's behavior in South Africa.

    Investigator's Response:

    This is one of the most common and manipulative anti-scientific libels used to prevent Duesberg from pursuing his counter-theory in a scientific manner. Like Dr. Moore, Kuritzky offers no evidence, references, or proof of any of these allegations, nor does an aggressive search reveal any clues to substantiate his claims.

    Prof. Duesberg was not "finally run out of the country (South Africa) as a murderer": He visited South Africa when President Thabo Mbeki summoned him for round table discussions between AIDS scientists of opposing viewpoints in 2000.

    Of the antagonistic, hostile, and threatening attacks made by Gallo defenders, former South African President Thabo Mbeki appealed to then-President Bill Clinton and UN Secretary General Kofi Annan (April 3, 2000), and:

    … passionately defended Duesberg and the other dissidents, and suggested that factors other than HIV could be the cause of AIDS in Africa. He called for a uniquely 'African solution' to the problem, as AIDS seemed to affect Africans differently to those who live in the developed world. He also defended his right to consult dissident scientists, and accused unnamed foreign critics of waging a 'campaign of intellectual intimidation and terrorism' akin to 'the racist apartheid tyranny we opposed'.

    In an earlier period in human history, Mbeki wrote, Duesberg and his followers 'would be the heretics that would be burnt at the stake. The day may not be far off when we will, once again, see books burnt and their authors immolated by fire by those who believe that they have a duty to conduct a holy crusade against the infidels.' The letter, copies of which were delivered by hand to Clinton and Annan, concluded: 'It would constitute a criminal betrayal of our responsibility to our own people to mimic foreign approaches to treating HIV/AIDS.'

    As stated earlier, prescribing toxic cancer chemotherapy to pregnant women is dangerous for both mother and child:

    "In reviewing the frequency of birth defects in this population [of HIV+ women taking AZT during pregnancy] we noted eight birth defects (10%) out of 80 live births [and 8 spontaneous fetal losses, for a total of 17% abnormal pregnancies]"

    More Questions

    The HIV/AIDS issue consists of two components:

      1. Dr. Gallo's original opinion, and;
      2. Millions of pages of research that are based upon, and used to support, Dr. Gallo's original opinion.

    While no ordinary investigator can competently argue millions of pages of HIV/AIDS research, it is equally disingenuous for any scientist to argue any research that is based upon Dr. Gallo's theory without proof that HIV a) actually exists, b) kills white blood cells, and c) causes AIDS. Consensus, based upon unproven hearsay, is not proof.

    At the same time, there are a number of easily understandable peer-reviewed reports that conflict with Gallo's theory.

    For example, chimpanzees share about 99% of the DNA in humans. Since it is unethical to test humans with potentially dangerous pathogens, they serve as the "gold standard" for scientific experiments. In the mid-1980's, AIDS researchers infected numerous chimps with HIV to induce AIDS. No chimpanzee has ever developed AIDS.

    "It is true that HIV does not cause AIDS in chimpanzees."

    It is said that HIV is spread through sex. Yet, the largest epidemiological study of heterosexual transmission of HIV was conducted in San Francisco from 1987-1997. The researchers observed 175 sexually-active discordant heterosexual couples (1 partner HIV+, 1 partner HIV-) for over six years. No person in the study contracted HIV.

    "We observed no seroconversions after entry into the study."
    (Padian, page 354.)
    Heterosexual Transmission of HIV in Northern California: Results from a Ten-year Study American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol 146: 350 - 357. (1997)

    HIV Testing

    The problem with HIV tests is that there is no viral gold standard. HIV test accuracy is not measured against any isolated (purified) HIV, but against indirect measures or patients with clinical symptoms of AIDS. These tests generally detect, and are hypersensitive to, antibodies of many different viruses and cellular debris. This $50,000 award, offered in exchange for scientific validation of any HIV test, remains unclaimed.

    Using a "cops and robbers" analogy, Dr. Gallo's HIV test relies on the presence of cops (antibodies) to indicate the presence of robbers (HIV). While it's true that cops appear at bank robberies, they also appear at doughnut shops, police stations, fundraisers, sporting events, and training academies. The presence of cops does not necessarily prove the presence of robbers.

    The autoimmunity phenomenon is characterized by an immune response against its own cells and tissues. So while the presence of HIV-antibodies (cops) may indicate that, at some point, someone may have been in contact with an HIV-virus or related particle (robbers), there is no way to ascertain the significance of such an event.

    Antibody production does not mean that the antigen is necessarily noxious.

    For example, the most common form of hypothyroidism is caused by anti-thyroid antibodies. This does not mean that the thyroid tissue is a harmful pathogen. The antibodies against virtually all endocrine organs, including ovaries, have been identified and (so far) no one has demanded the mass performance of thyroidectomies or ovarectomies. This becomes more complicated since many patients with anti-thyroid or anti-ovarian antibodies do not suffer from significant target organ damage. In this "cops and robbers" analogy, the cops (antivirus) are sometimes summoned by those who have mistaken the noise of a stray cat for a home invasion robbery.

    Consider the "metal detector" analogy: To prevent terrorists from boarding planes (or HIV in our blood supply), HIV test sensitivities are set so that Jimmy's orthodontics and Grandma's titanium hips activate the alarms. Once those alarms sound, the tests brand them as suspected terrorists.

    Kevin Kuritzky:

    The fact that any westernized physician, particularly an Ob-Gyn (SSI member) can defend Peter Duesberg is beyond my comprehension. I think any Ob-Gyn that fails to administer anti-retrovirals to a pregnant woman should not only be peer-reviewed, but should be put in jail. Yet, Dr. Duesberg has espoused this sickening ideology.

    Investigator's Response:

    Remember that SSI chose to answer Kuritzky's letter because he offered the most common and coherent attack against Prof. Duesberg. In light of the aforementioned evidence of his criminal behavior, it was extremely difficult for this investigator to take any of Kuritzky's TAG-generated myths seriously.

    Kuritzky also illustrates that the hysteria that incarcerated history's first scientist and Dr. Semmelweis still exists today. When science becomes a hysterical political argument and criminal attacks, science and human progress cease to exist. Nevertheless, the record appears to reflect that these are Mr. Kuritzky's (and TAG's) strongest arguments. Indeed, these also appear to be the same political arguments used to coerce scientists and physicians into politicizing real science.

    Panic & Politics

    In the late spring of 1981, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were coming under increasing Congressional pressure to clean up the waste and corruption that characterized their ten-year War on Cancer.

    At the same time, CDC epidemiologist Dr. Wayne Shandera reported that five homosexual men in their 20s and 30s were stricken by a pneumonia that ordinarily struck cancer and transplant patients. Said Shandera, "The best we can say is that somehow the pneumonia appears to be related to gay life style."

    The report stated that five patients also suffered from infections due to a virus "that causes mononucleosis-type symptoms" and is "shown to be capable of suppressing the body's immune defense system in a manner similar to anti-cancer drugs."

    Investigators speculated that the virus (CMV) was "suppressing the immune defense system of certain individuals sufficiently to make them vulnerable to the
    P. carenii already present in most persons' lungs."

    "They are carrying out an intensive study to learn what the common factor may be in the lifestyle of gay males. One speculation is that the inhalants commonly used in the gay community to heighten sexual feeling may somehow be involved."

    When the story came out, some insensitive clergy and ideologues suggested in the media that AIDS was "punishment for homosexuals who violated God's Law." Homosexuals and their advocates were understandably hurt by these remarks. Unfortunately for science, this immediately polarized and politicized the debate. While the extreme right sought to stigmatize AIDS as a "gay disease" that was unworthy of attention, the left exaggerated the risk that AIDS posed to the general population and demanded endless funding.

    Policymakers were understandably reluctant to shift billions of dollars in research funding from deadlier diseases like heart disease (#1) and cancer (#2) to a lesser understood pathology that appeared to only affect a small population segment.

    When the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) protested the skeptical "homophobic and AIDS-phobic coverage" of the New York Post, the US media killed all stories that suggested the propriety of a careful government response. Without the media's support, politicians, government officials, and drug manufacturers grew unwilling to risk the homophobe label. This appears to coincide with the period when American science was corrupted by the political debate.

    The result was devastating to those most vulnerable. Poisonous toxins suddenly became available as the FDA rushed their approval of new AIDS medications in as little as six weeks. During the AZT trials, Burroughs-Wellcome used their own researchers to test and distribute AZT with little more than hat tip from the FDA:

    "By the middle of 1985 there were over 10,000 AIDS patients anxiously awaiting a drug. The extreme patient need for a drug sped up the process from test tube to patient tremendously. After filing six patents on the preparation and use of AZT, and racing through necessary animal tests in partnership with the NCI, Burroughs-Wellcome submitted an application to the FDA for an Investigational New Drug (IND). In a miracle of bureaucracy, the FDA approved of the first AZT trial in only seven days."
    Wastila, L.J., Lasagna, L.
    The history of zidovudine (AZT).
    Journal of Clinical Research and Pharmaco-Epidemiology, 4: 25-37 (1990)

    When word spread that AZT trials at Burroughs-Wellcome required placebos for half of their 282 HIV/AIDS patients, the media fueled several more controversies:

    "Some critics believed that AZT was too toxic for weak AIDS patients, and others accused Burroughs Wellcome and the FDA with hindering the drug's ability. Many critics felt that the placebo arm of the arm was unethical, and called for all patients to have access to the drug. Burroughs Wellcome's spokespersons vigorously defended the trial, but the company recognized the high stakes of the trial and, in collaboration with the NCI and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), they established the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) consisting of various AIDS experts that were removed from the trial.

    "In September of 1986, only 7 months after the trial started, the board concluded that there was a significantly lower mortality rate in patients randomly assigned to receive AZT than the placebo. Only one of the 145 patients receiving AZT had died, compared with 16 patient deaths from the 137-patient group. The trial was halted, and the patients who received placebos were given an opportunity to take AZT… by March of 1987, 4500 AIDS patients, or one-third of all Americans living with AIDS, had received free Retrovir (AZT) handouts from the company

    "In less than three years, AZT had progressed from the obscure shelves of Burroughs Wellcome to pharmacies all across the country, providing patients a measure of hope at a time when there was none…"

    T.E. Haigler
    Former president of Burroughs Wellcome
    (on the company's research of AZT)

    Former NCI director Dr. Samuel Broder characterized the three-year-process as moving "at the speed of light." AZT retailed for $188 per bottle, or approximately $7,000 to $10,000 per patient, per year. Compared with today's FDA standards, three years is a glacial pace.

    Hundreds of billions of dollars were subsequently transferred from cancer and cardiovascular disease research and, as the uncontrolled waste and abuse spread, scientists, physicians, and universities truncated reports, shortcut peer review studies, and attacked those who challenged their questionable methodologies. Millions of research pages and articles were subsequently generated that cited, complimented, and supported other research papers that all assumed that Dr. Gallo's HIV theory was an "established scientific conclusion."

    Gay men and drug addicts who were terrorized by the fear and propaganda campaign about HIV, and stigmatized by unreliable HIV tests, stampeded to AIDS clinics for fast prescriptions of lethal doses of AZT. The greatest period of mortality (1987-1995) attributed to HIV occurred during the exact years of AZT mono-therapy. Coincidentally, as AZT was replaced by less toxic drugs, mortality also dropped to current levels. Liver failure remains the leading cause of death among HIV+ patients who use the current generation of black-box anti-HIV medications. Liver failure is caused by drug toxicity and is not considered an AIDS-defining illness.

    When 13-year-old Ryan White was diagnosed as HIV+ in 1984, his illness further fueled the hysteria. In 1987, Oprah Winfrey quoted "scientific predictions" that 20 percent of all heterosexual men would die from AIDS by 1990:

    "By 1996, three to five million Americans will be HIV positive and one million will be dead from AIDS."

    NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, NY Times, 14 Jan 1986

    "By 1991, HIV will have spread to between 5 and 10 million Americans."

    Newsweek, 10 Nov 1986

    "By 1991, 1 in 10 babies may be AIDS victims."

    USA Today headline, 20 Jul 1988

    "Without massive federal AIDS intervention, there may be no one left."

    HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, 1993
    Washington Times, 8 Jun 1999

    Once the massive government fire hose was turned on to fight the "War on AIDS," competing, fact-based, scientific views, were drowned out or otherwise suppressed.

    Because so few middle-class, white heterosexuals ever got AIDS or knew someone who did, many Americans passively disconnected themselves from the campaign.


    Within the scientific community, the HIV/AIDS question may have been one symptom of an even larger disease.

    During the 1980s, the general public began to under-value and under-appreciate the work of independent academic scientists like Prof. Duesberg. NIH grants became scarce, endowments dried up, and tuitions barely covered teaching activities. As a result, the salaries and social status of academic faculty members began to decline and many talented individuals fled the universities.

    Due to this negative selection, the majority who stayed in academia became very different from classic scientific giants like Robert Koch. While this did not mean that all academicians became unethical, it was easier to become disillusioned and cynical in such environment. Some faculty members grew desperate in their search for some form of a steady income that would compensate for many years of education and training. The pharmaceutical industry was more than happy to help – for a price.

    This situation is described in the book, The Truth About the Drug Companies, by former New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) editor Marcia Angell. When, in an earlier NEJM editorial, Dr. Angell asked, "Is Academic Medicine for Sale?" a reader replied, "No, the current owner (Pharmaceutical Industry) is very happy with it!"

    Anti-retroviral drugs are all in categories of known or unknown danger to fetal development. In the post-thalidomide age, the FDA strongly recommends against administering these drugs during gestation. None are "safe" to mother or fetus. (one example)

    Celia Farber also documented the horrific death from organ failure in pregnant mother Joyce Ann Hafford, who was being treated with AIDS drugs (nevirapine and combivir, made with AZT) while pregnant with her second child.

    In March 1996, the FDA authorized the sale and distribution of crixivan six weeks after Merck applied for FDA approval. Compared to the years taken to complete 110 clinical tests before approving Splenda and AZT's "light speed" three-year testing, it's hard to imagine how the FDA could safely approve anything in 42 days.

    Noted for being "well tolerated" and causing substantial improvements in "CD4 cell counts and viral load," the crixivan report noted that "the relevance of changes in viral load had not been established"; nor did it show any effect on the development of infection, survival, or as a cure for AIDS.

    In light of the profit margins related to drugs like crixivan and the catastrophic deaths related to toxins like nevirapine, it's hard to ignore the potential profits generated by panicked people who learn they've tested HIV+.

    AIDS prescriptions are costly. reports that pharmacies charge $570/mo for crixivan capsules:

    $570/mo x 12mo = $6,840/year

    When multiplied by the estimated US population of one million HIV+ patients, potential income for crixivan alone can be considerable:

    $6,840,000,000.00 (BILLION) per YEAR

    The drugs aptivus ($1117/mo) and fuzeon ($2315/mo) cost much more. As of this writing, Merck shares sold at $35/share. (more info here)

    The export and consumption of these untested known toxins by mostly rural and poor villagers of foreign countries is also disturbing.

    HIV/AIDS science appears to target minorities. HIV test drives are sharply focused on the African American community, which was Joyce Ann Hafford's misfortune.

    Abbott Laboratories recently donated $60 million in their five-year program to urge black Americans to be tested for HIV. According to Abbott, their "I Stand with Magic" campaign "intends to halve the rate of new infections among US blacks."

    Despite Dr. Gallo's unproven HIV/AIDS hypothesis, basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson uses "his fame to raise public awareness of the virus that causes AIDS." Moviemaker Spike Lee, who directed the public service ads, said, "We African Americans can be homophobic. There's a whole lot of re-education that needs to get started."

    According to the same LA Times article:

    … the heads of the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People… took HIV tests in public and made testing available at their annual convention. That same year, 16 mainstream black organizations, including 100 Black Men of America, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and the National Council of Negro Women, pledged to fight the epidemic.

    "The black community is where the gay white community probably was in the late 1980s or early 1990s," said Dr. Wilbert C. Jordan, medical director of the OASIS Clinic at the Martin Luther King Jr. Multi-Service Ambulatory Care Center. "But we're not where we need to be still."The numbers provide ample reason for alarm. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, blacks make up almost half the estimated 1.2 million Americans living with HIV today, though they are just 13% of the U.S. population overall.

    The same article cited the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) assertion that "women accounted for more than a third of AIDS cases diagnosed among African Americans in 2006." KFF is the same organization that hosted the aforementioned 2006 journalism conference where drug industry-funded panelists told journalists how to marginalize alleged denialists.

    Professor Henry Bauer has shown that, for all available US demographics, people of African descent are on average 8-10 times more likely to test HIV positive than Caucasians. Since this has been the case for two decades now, this may also be an indication that the tests are racially biased.

    The AIDS industry has accused Africa of being responsible for the original spread of HIV, that Africans enjoy "dry sex", are more promiscuous than people on other continents, and hold voodoo beliefs about health, medicine, and healing. Ironically, Benin is one African country where voodoo still keeps HIV/AIDS mortality below two percent.

    Although the World Health Organization (WHO) recently reported that the threat of a "heterosexual pandemic" of AIDS was over, AIDS activists still insist that millions are infected and dying from the "AIDS epidemic." Despite the WHO report, the Congress intends to authorize another $50 Billion in new AIDS funding to Africa this year.

    Of the aid package, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Howard Berman declared, "We have a moral imperative to act and to act decisively."

    While critics lament the absence of research funding (it was ONLY $12.6 Billion FY 2006), it's hard to know where that funding goes when drug companies don't conduct tests or trials. The reluctance of funded researchers to accept, for example, the Perth Group's modest request also becomes more understandable; and it could also explain their 21-year hostility toward Prof. Duesberg, Ms. Farber, and hundreds of other scientists, physicians, and journalists who try to report it to US Government officials (NIH, HHS, NIAID) who still refuse to listen.

    In time, and if no one asks these critical questions, the drug companies may slowly wean their more sensible customers from toxins to life-saving placebos without losing funding. Eventually, ground celery seed capsules under the label of thiswontkillyouflex and sold for $500 a bottle could keep HIV+ patients and drug companies alive for more than a normal lifespan. If and when this occurs, the drug companies, scientists, and politicians could finally congratulate themselves for winning Dr. Gallo's "War on AIDS."


    In many ways, today's HIV/AIDS industry resembles a mature termite colony.

    In the years since HIV produced Dr. Gallo's first egg, workers (administrators and researchers) have built a labyrinthine fortress of carton walls (research and facilities) to support the colony. While its soldiers defend the colony and king, Dr. Gallo and HIV are managed, groomed, and fed by the attending workers that surround, care for, and defend them.

    At first glance, the fortress appears impenetrable and the dark interconnected passages too confusing to navigate. After more than twenty years and millions of pages of research and studies that are built upon Gallo's original egg, no sane person could attempt to comprehend the infinite trivia without going mad. To argue against the mountains of interdependent self-supported HIV/AIDS minutiae requires terabytes of computational power and the tenacity of the world's most obnoxious sports fans.

    The key to the conundrum lies not with the carton walls, workers, soldiers, or the myriad unnavigable passages, but with Dr. Gallo's original HIV declaration itself.

    The principle of Occam's razor states that the best explanation tends to be one that requires the fewest additional assumptions. Such an explanation invokes the fewest intermediate factors (i.e., 25 years of HIV/AIDS research) while maintaining its "predictive power"; that is, its ability to explain current data to predict future data. If we apply Occam's razor and the Scientific Method, it is clear that the relationship of HIV/AIDS was never formally proven, and to assert that it is true until disproven is fallacious.

    When asked which argument most strongly convinced him that HIV was not the cause of AIDS, Nobel laureate Kary Mullis replied, "The fact that there's no evidence for it."

    One does not need to be a pharmaceutically-funded AIDS researcher to understand these questions. Occam's razor and the Scientific Method are both taught in grade schools around the world. When the scientific world reacquaints itself with these principles and reestablishes the discipline to apply them, the queen will die and Gallo's colony will collapse.

    Of scientific consensus, Michael Crichton said:

    "(T)he work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus… There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period."


    With millions of diagnosed and undiagnosed HIV+ men and women leading healthy and productive lives around the world without AIDS medication, this investigator is left with Prof. Duesberg's lingering questions and Dr. Gallo's hysterical defenders, who, this investigator has personally discovered, appear predisposed to use libelous and criminal tactics to silence those who ask questions. (see Epilogue)

    These questions are not insignificant. No other science appears to be defended more aggressively than Dr. Gallo's theory. If an investigator questions the curvature of the Earth, or the internal combustion engine, it's hard to imagine NASA or Honda paying SPACETruth or HONDATruth advocates to defend either discipline. Indeed, both topics are clearly presented on public websites and libraries around the world without fear, intimidation, or the threat of lost grant funding. The idea that advocates would use criminal means to dissuade someone from investigating the internal combustion engine would seem preposterous; and yet, hundreds if not thousands of journalists, teachers, scientists, and ordinary individuals are routinely targeted by Dr. Gallo's well-funded defenders.

    Only one of two conclusions is possible:

    1. This investigator has deliberately, unintentionally, or recklessly overlooked the answer to these fundamental questions to present an unsupportable conspiracy theory, complete with imaginary threats, emails, and phone calls memorialized in his 66-page police report and pending federal lawsuit, or;
    2. The pharmaceutical companies are:
    • Using inaccurate, unverified testing protocols to claim people are infected with a retrovirus that has not been shown to cause harm but, they claim, could kill;
    • Inventing, manufacturing, and distributing toxins designed to disrupt normal cellular and enzymatic functions necessary to sustain life to fight the presence of a harmless passenger retrovirus;
    • Using those toxins to deliberately, unintentionally, or recklessly compromise what may otherwise be healthy immune systems, and;
    • Manipulating drug-caused illness and mortality statistics to maintain HIV/AIDS funding
    • Enlisting and paying uninformed but well-meaning celebrities to promote HIV testing and treatment to specific targets (gay community, low-income minorities, and third world populations) that are most vulnerable to seductive and high-pressure marketing strategies.

    If the first conclusion is true, this investigator will continue to enjoy a long healthy life with his family and friends in Southern California.

    If the second conclusion is true, America could eventually recover from the scandal: but it's hard to calculate the impact of the needless suffering, death, lost confidence in American science and good will, class action lawsuits, lost shareholder value, product liability, the wasted energy and resources expended within our academic institutions, its effect in the international community and the US and global economies.

    If the survivors of "Dr. Gallo's Egg" sense that government agencies and drug companies took shortcuts that unnecessarily killed otherwise healthy people, like 13-year-old Ryan White, agencies, politicians, and the media will soon start pointing fingers to blame someone for igniting a human disaster that could make Enron and 9/11 look like garden-variety purse snatches and auto accidents. Families of those who suffered and died from the toxicity of drugs like AZT will want to attack politicians. Politicians will blame agencies for misleading them, and those agencies will blame previous administrations.

    A backlash against media, and within, the gay community, could also result. The gay and lesbian media, community centers, and HIV/AIDS advocacy groups that employ thousands and profit from generous pharmaceutical sponsors and CDC grants for advertising, lavish event planning, hosting, and fundraising will end. Threatened by the loss of such funding, these organizations will be reluctant to close their doors to seek other employment.

    Scientists will hide behind their research, doctors behind their hospitals, gays behind their physicians and clinics, politicians behind their constituents, and journalists behind their editors. The most obvious targets will be the drug companies that produced, distributed, and profited by selling known toxins throughout what may be nothing more than a 25-year sabbatical from the science.

    The medical and academic members of Semmelweis Society International cannot be sure because those who insist that HIV is harmful still refuse to prove HIV's connection to AIDS. What is not disputed are the poisonous properties listed on the labels of ALL FDA approved HIV/AIDS medications.

    No one is competently required to prove the non-existence of Dr. Gallo HIV/AIDS theory. Prof. Duesberg raised questions about Gallo's theory twenty years ago that Gallo and his defenders still refuse to answer. When Dr. Gallo and his defenders decide to prove that HIV exists, attacks white blood cells, and causes AIDS, their investment of ten months and $100,000 will finally put these questions to rest – as they should have been 24 years ago.

    Based upon the evidence contained in this report, this investigator must agree with hundreds of reputable scientists and doctors who remain unconvinced that Dr. Gallo's retrovirus is real or has anything to do with the disease called AIDS.

    It is this history, this evidence, and these questions that Professor Duesberg, Ms. Farber and countless others have risked their careers to present. The members of Semmelweis Society International may or may not agree with all aspects of this report, but they unwaveringly support the courageous men and women of medicine and science who continue to ask questions about the world around us.

    Without honest and intellectually curious scientists like Peter Duesberg, humanity loses the promise of innovation and progress. Without aggressive and impartial journalists like Celia Farber, industry and government cannot be held accountable. Without both, the 232-year experiment we call the United States of America will have failed.

    Clark Baker
    Los Angeles


    INVESTIGATOR'S NOTE: Under ordinary circumstances, I would list and thank those who assisted me in this investigation and subsequent report. Because of current conditions within the scientific community and pharmaceutical industry, exposing these witnesses as potential targets would serve no legitimate purpose. When the day comes, the world will know the difference between those who served Humanity, and those who served themselves at Humanity's expense.

    More HERE