Topics
[Click on radio buttons or press assigned key with Ctrl (Mac) or Alt (Win)]
[a] Individualist Anarchism
[b] Philosophical Egoism
[c] Other Egoist Sites
[d] More Anti-Statism
[e] Anarchism and Feminism
[f] Anti-war Propaganda
[g] Civilian-Based Defense
[h] Major anarchist resources on the web
[i] Libertarianism, etc. on the web
[j] The "Austrian School" of Economics
[k] The Loyal Opposition
[l] The HIV=AIDS Controversy
[m] Thoughts of School
[n] Odd Bins
[o] Search Engines
Letter to Bruce Alberts from Fred Cline, Jr.
From the archives of The Memory Hole

HIV=AIDS Controversy: Letters Department

The following letter dated 12 September 1997 to Dr. Bruce Alberts from Fred A. Cline, Jr., is a rejoinder to Martin Delaney's call for punishment of Peter Duesberg by the National Academy of Sciences for not toeing the party line. Special attention should be paid to the recent findings discussed in the letter. (Note: Dr. Alberts confirmed the existence of the Delaney epistle referred to below.)

Friday, September 12, 1997

Dr. Bruce Alberts
President, National Academy of Sciences
2101 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20418

Dear Dr. Alberts:

I am writing in response to an alleged letter written to you by Martin Delaney of Project Inform dated 31 July 1997. In this letter Mr. Delaney appears to try to enlist you in a campaign to discredit and further restrict Prof. Peter Duesberg in his effort to expose the AIDS hoax. It is interesting to note that his letter was written in advance of Peter's lecture at the Metropolitan Community Church on 9 August of this year. I attended that lecture and was enthralled by one of the most dynamic and intelligent lecturers I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. Apparently, I am not alone in my opinion about this event because there was a spontaneous standing ovation lasting many minutes at the end of the lecture by from 250 to 300 people.

What has prompted me to write at this time regarding this affair is the appearance of an article in the August 15 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology by Padian, et al. entitled "Heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in Northern California: results from a ten-year study." As you must know, Nancy Padian is with the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at UCSF, the very institution from which you migrated to Washington, D.C. In this article we find the following (p. 355): "In general, we estimate that infectivity for male-to-female transmission is low, approximately 0.0009 per contact, and that infectivity for female-to-male transmission is even lower."

Peter Duesberg, basing his facts on previous studies, has said exactly the same thing, i.e. that HIV is transmitted only 1 in 1000 contacts. As a microbiologist, you must know that this is not a viable pathogen. No STD could survive if it were to be passed on from one host to another with such inefficiency.

The question next asked by everyone is then what is killing these people?

The answer seems fairly obvious to anyone who might even attempt to be objective--a combination of recreational and prescribed drugs. The prescribed drugs are administered on the basis of a bogus HIV test that is not specific to HIV and probably gives 100% false positive results. This does not deter the zealots, however, for to become HIV positive is still to be saddled with a death sentence. Since when have pathogens , indeed if HIV is a pathogen at all, become 100% efficient? I would like to remind you that "Ninety to 95 percent of all polio infections were inapparent, or without symptoms" (CDC statistics). To be redundant, I would like to ask again, Do we now have a 100% fatal pathogen? If so, then the whole history of biology has been re-written.

But then I should not be surprised if this were the case because we are getting such absurd assertions as those made by Jaap Goudsmit in Viral Sex (Ox ford University Press, 1997), viz. (from the introduction) "As this book will tell HIV has already adapted to a human host. Spread mainly through sexual intercourse, HIV found ample opportunity to spread to epidemic proportions when it encountered highly promiscuous subgroups of homosexuals in Europe and heterosexuals in Africa and South America. Some HIVs became efficient at anal transmission, while others became efficient at vaginal transmission.

All the while, the virus was increasing its production to spread better, which incidentally caused AIDS."

This clearly is no longer science. These two positions cannot be reconciled. Either one or the other is inventing and I am convinced it is the latter. Dr. Padian, in confirming Dr. Duesberg's findings, has done us a great service by placing the whole HIV hypothesis in the dust bin of failed hypotheses.

As the President of the National Academy of Sciences, and as a man of integrity, I should think you would be concerned about the current state of affairs, and, would, under the circumstances, want to support Dr. Duesberg in his efforts to bring truth back into science. Restoring his right to publish in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences would go a long way toward rectifying the problem.

(...)

Sincerely,


Fred A. Cline, Jr.

copies: Peter Duesberg, Nancy Padian, Martin Delaney, Donna Shalala, etc.

✳ ✳ ✳