Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy

Seeking Stories of AIDS Denialism


All information will be kept confidential.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Southern Poverty Law Center's HateWatch and the AIDS Deniers

AFA’s Bryan Fischer: HIV Doesn’t Cause AIDS

Posted in Anti-LGBT by Leah Nelson on January 6, 2012

It’s tempting to describe American Family Association spokesman Bryan Fischer as a close-minded, reactionary bigot. But when it comes to embracing fresh ideas that support his beliefs – heck, he pretty much outdoes us all.

Remember when he said that gays were responsible for the Holocaust? Or the time he claimed that states can require public officials to pass religious tests, directly contradicting both a 50-year-old Supreme Court decision and the express wishes of the Founding Fathers themselves? These are not exactly mainstream theories, but, ever open-minded, Fischer adopted them anyway.

And just when you think he’s reached the outermost limits of revisionism, Fischer one-ups himself by promoting a theory so breathtakingly outrageous that it makes his previous claims seem tame.

Well, he’s done it again, declaring during an anti-gay tirade on his radio show Tuesday that there is no connection between the HIV virus and AIDS.

He even had someone to back him up: Peter Duesberg, a professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California at Berkeley whose hypothesis about AIDS has made him a pariah among his peers.

Once revered as a genius for his pioneering cancer research, Duesberg since 1987 has been a leading proponent of the so-called “denialist” hypothesis that HIV does not cause AIDS. He offers a range of possible alternative causes, claiming at different times that AIDS is a “fabricated epidemic,” that it is triggered by the use of recreational drugs, and that it is caused by the antiretroviral drugs that have improved and prolonged the lives of countless HIV-infected persons.

That’s not what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says.

“The scientific evidence is overwhelming that HIV is the cause of AIDS,” Dr. Jonathan Mermin, director of the CDC’s Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, told Hatewatch via E-mail. “Infection with HIV has been the sole common factor shared by people with AIDS throughout the world. In addition, antiretroviral medicines developed specifically against HIV have been associated with dramatic reductions in the incidence of AIDS and mortality. Statements that AIDS is not caused by HIV are misleading and potentially dangerous.”

That seems an understatement. In 2000, Duesberg served on a commission charged by then-South African President Thabo Mbeki with determining whether HIV caused AIDS. Already inclined to disbelieve the connection, Mbeki accepted the conclusion that the two were not linked, leading to a disastrous public policy that caused an estimated 330,000 South Africans to die from AIDS, according to a 2010 report in AIDS and Behavior, a public health journal.

On Fischer’s show, Duesberg said that intravenous drugs are responsible for 50% of all cases of AIDS in America. “Most of the rest of the other half is male homosexuals – but not your all-American male homosexual from next door,” he said. “It’s the ones who have what they call ‘cruising,’ that have hundreds of –thousands of – sexual contacts in a short time. They can only accomplish that like our Olympians break records now, by taking lots of drugs.”

Fischer interviewed Duesberg in the context of discussing a proposed Los Angeles ordinance that would require performers in pornographic films to use condoms on the set.

Duesberg’s statistics – which suggest that half of AIDS patients are IV drug users and half are promiscuous gay men who use drugs to enhance their libido – do not quite square with reality. The CDC’s most recent statistics (here and here) do show that gay and bisexual men account for the majority of new HIV infections – 61% in 2009 – and that overall, 49% of Americans living with AIDS are gay or bisexual men. Neither numbers nor science say that all these men were drug-addicted sex fiends – and more to the point, 27% of those infected in 2009 were heterosexuals. Only 9% were IV drug users.

Asked to respond to the CDC’s statement about his hypothesis, Duesberg challenged the authority of the CDC, demanding evidence to back up this reporter’s characterization of the organization as an internationally recognized authority on epidemiology.

He also acknowledged that he had not heard of Bryan Fischer prior to speaking on his show. In response, Hatewatch provided him with several examples of Fischer’s most offensive and inaccurate anti-gay comments, reading verbatim his 2010 declaration that “Homosexuality gave us Adolph Hitler, and homosexuals in the military gave us the Brown Shirts, the Nazi war machine and six million dead Jews.”

Duesberg – who, according to a lengthy 2008 profile in Discovermagazine, was born in Münster, Germany, in 1936 and grew up to the tune of air raid sirens, and whose father volunteered to serve in the German army – said he had never heard that theory before, and said he would need to see the context of Fischer’s comment before passing judgment. When Hatewatch forwarded him a linkto Fischer’s original blog post, he responded via E-mail, “I am not ready to comment on Bryan Fischer at this time, beyond our radio discussion of AIDS until I had a chance to talk to him directly. I have seen too many examples, including my own, where a scientifically correct point of view is twisted into a politically incorrect one, to diminish an opponents [sic] character.”

He also wrote, “I do not ‘marginalize’ male or female homosexuals. On the contrary, I have sacrifized [sic] status and career investments to find a scientific answer to AIDS, which is primarily a gay syndrome in the US.”

Duesberg may not seek to marginalize LGBT people (though, according to the Discover article, he repeatedly referred to them as “homos”) – but Bryan Fischer certainly does. Summing up his takeaway from Duesberg in a blog post yesterday, he wrote, “Bottom line? HIV does not cause AIDS. So let’s immediately stop spending billions of dollars trying to kill a harmless microbe. And secondly, let’s tell homosexuals to stop sleeping with other men, stop using poppers, and stop shooting up. If they listen to that message, public health will improve, everybody will live longer, and taxpayers will be able to keep more of their money. What’s not to like?”

“That,” responded Brian Chase of the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which is pushing the condom ordinance, “might be one of the dumbest things Bryan Fischer’s ever said – and that is saying quite a bit.”


  1. The fact that many of the AIDS Dissidents are themselves gay and continue to support Duesberg is a glaring example of their desperation. Are they self hating? I doubt it is that simple. But it is still very sad that they are willing to support a man who promotes such obvious hatred toward the very basis of who they are.

    Duesberg claiming that that gay men have "hundreds of thousands of sexual contacts in a short time" is absolutely ludicrous and the very definition of stereotyping, not to mention blatant, hateful bigotry. AIDS Dissidents need to stand up to this kind of blatant bigotry instead of pandering to such an obviously hateful, despicable man.

    The same goes with Clark Baker. He happily calls gay men "nitrite huffing promiscuous men" "meth trannies" and worse.

    Come on AIDS Dissidents, if you truly believe in truth, why not stand up for truth in all areas? Is promoting this "view" worth giving up your self respect by supporting people who so clearly think quite lowly of you indeed?

  2. Interesting read Dr. Kalichman. I find the psychology of aids denial horrifyingly fascinating, and the above article makes it even more so.

    I simply can't fathom how any human being can take such a vacation from rationality and be comfortable with it, but then again, there is a reason why I major in hard science and not the social variety. My brain simply can't process certain behavior as my analytical mind does not seem to allow for it.

    Good read nonetheless.

    1. Robby, I also find it extremely fascinating. I found out about AIDS denial through the people who deny the efficacy of vaccines. I was thinking "What could be more ludicrous than denying that we have eradicated a virus that used to be a major killer?" Well, it turned out denying that such a virus ever existed in the first place. So yeah, smallpox was a figment of our imagination, and HIV is a conspiracy by the drug companies. Some people are just deranged beyond all hope of salvation.

    2. NotElon,

      I have yet to read Seth's book, but I do think it would be an interesting read when I can find the time. I am still on the fence as to if denialist behavior is the result of blatant ignorance or mental instability. I suppose it could be a combination of both.

      What is interesting to me is that denialists claim there is so much disagreement among the orthodoxy" over HIV causation. This is simply not the case. The vast majority of my professors have terminal degrees in their field and they have never even heard of AIDS denial.

    3. I think some of them are certainly mentally unstable. Look at my and Snout's "debate" with Andy Lindsay in the previous thread. Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos has no history of medicine, biology, chemistry or anything of the sort. She just woke up one day and decided to be an HIV expert. Clark Baker wasn't even a scientist. I don't think you can read his affidavit about how he is an expert helicopter pilot and interviewed drug dealers as proof of his capacity of an expert witness and not wonder if he is all there.

      But some of them are rational, if somewhat ignorant. After all, you feel perfectly healthy, and then you are told that there is something horribly wrong with you based on some numbers that, for all you know, could be pulled out of a hat. The medicine does have side effects, and some people have severe allergic reactions to NNRTIs and protease inhibitors. If you did, and you were a suspicious person, you would notice you felt a whole lot better once you stopped taking it. Emory Taylor didn't sound insane. He just couldn't understand that he could feel fine on the outside, while his body was being silently ravaged within.

      Most anti-vaccine are not irrational either. Certainly their leaders are. Rebecca Carley, I think, was diagnosed with schizophrenia sometime after finishing medical school. But most do not actually believe measles is gone or is not a serious disease. The most common anti-vax request to doctors now is no longer to withhold the vaccines, but to space them out more. I think that is a rational "compromise" between us scientists who are now getting the word out about how dangerous these pathogens are and the natropaths who talk about autism.

    4. NotElon,

      Excellent points!

      I can certainly understand how the HIV+ lay person could be confused about the various happenings within the human body because how they "feel" is not always indicative of their overall health. HIV researchers used to consider the HIV virus to be "dormant" for what they hypothesized was a variable incubation period. Now, of course, modern medicine knows that HIV begins attacking the immune system from the moment of infection.

      Also factor in the psychological component of their level of desperation at receiving a diagnosis that will potentially kill them. Anything that offers an alternative can seem extremely enticing, no matter how irrational.

      What I fail to fully understand is how people who are not HIV+ can sleep at night by acting as an advocate for theories that have lead to so much needless loss of life. Doctors and scientists in particular have chosen a path in life that requires an obligation to their fellow man by using their knowledge to protect life.

      I do not understand how any doctor or scientist who has amassed that many credit hours in chemistry, biology, micro, pathology,etc could possibly harbor such ridiculous ideas that defy even rudimentary teachings in life science.

      Your guess is as good as mine.

  3. OMG, supaflyrobby......another gay activist recruited to the ranks of AIDSTRUTH, spreading the pernicious gospel of pharma.

  4. More confirmation of self-loathing homophobes being extremely well-represented in the Denialism cause. (See Clark Baker).

  5. Have you seen Clark Baker's latest? He claims that Humanitarian interest in decriminalizing HIV is ALL because of Baker's "work" in this area since 2009! Seriously!

    I don't think that is true, but I did see Baker walk on water one time!

  6. Ignorance is Bliss. Freedom is slavery. War is Peace.

    Ultimately, science is destabalizing. Brave New World, that has such people in it. Tis new to thee. Huxley knew that a stable society must pretend to promote science, but actually must suppress science. Too many advances in science ultimately lead to instability. Just as Grand Inquisitors must pretend to promote religion, while they ruthlessly stamp out the true believers.

    The Clark Calibans are a base nature on whom nurture will never stick.

    Yes, if Clark has his way, everyone will come to love Big Brother.

  7. Grand Inquisitors for ClarkJanuary 17, 2012 at 10:35 PM

    I resent the comment from Big Brother Clark!

    We, the Grand Inquisitors, are in charge. We tell people not what to believe- not pesky scientists. We stopped Galileo, and we inspired Dostoesky. Freedom to follow the facts? Forget it! We hunt down individuals of conscience. We harass them, throw them out of jobs. They must kiss our ring!

    Big Brother is an imposter. Stick with the original, the theocratic, the only true way. Join us, the Grand Inquisitors, stick to the bible. Down with evolution, down with thinking. The one, the eternal, the anti-gay way, the Clark Baker way is the only way!

    Suffering is the only way to a heavenly reward. People, accept your suffering! Stop trying to cure disease! Down with all vaccines! Down with Hippocrates! Up with suffering! You will thank us after you are dead.

  8. Looks like Celia Farber is finally admitting she is an AIDS Denialist and embracing this fact. This is from her Truthbarrier site:

    "Celia Ingrid Farber is an American print journalist and author, best known for her part in the campaign which denies that AIDS is an infectious disease."

    Way to go, Celia. The hardest part is admitting you have a problem. Or in this case, that you are part of the problem!

    1. She didn't admit anything. She took wikipedia's description of her instead of writing her own.

  9. It worked! Clark has been our pawn the whole time!

    No one has advanced the interests of BIg Pharma more than Clark Baker. That is why we have bankrolled his whole operation the whole time!

    It was a false flag operation. By hiring Clark to attack us, we enlisted the sympathy of the entire community! After all, if whackos like Clark attacked us, people will like us all the more!

    Clark is well worth the $90 Million that we have paid him and his confederates, including Pharma-slut Celia Farber! Farber/Clark united the scientific community as never before! We were able to get the entire community to sign the Durban Declaration. This would never have happened without the craziness of the out-of-control crowd.

    Sure, we Big Pharma fatcats have our problems. We like our profits. But now our shortcomings are a speck compared to the huge mountain of Clark/Farber fraud.

    Thanks Clark! You have now proved to be our perfect excuse. Whenever things go wrong, from now on we can just blame you.

    Clark Baker. Big Pharma's best puppet. Our best excuse.

    He did our bidding, and never realized that he is the biggest pharma-slut of all time!

  10. We resent the comments of Big Pharma. We, the crazy doctors at AAPS, are the true sponsors of Clark! We are pulling the puppet strings, doing the bidding of our masters the Koch brothers. We funded the so-called grass roots Tea Party to foster brainlessness. Idiocy runs America. With Clark and the AAPS rooting for brainlessness, it is so easy to convert the US to a plutocracy.

    The Grand Inquisitor/Big Brother/Pharma think they are in charge because we let them. This is government by the mindless rich for the mindless.

    Denialism is the Soma of the people. Let them argue over rubbish so they can't think. When science and merit fall, we rich will have it all.

    Down with critical thinking! Down with science! Down with medicine! The AAPS are not doctors- we only wear white coats so you won't notice our white robes!

    Good job Clark! You are the last great white hope. We remnants of the KKK salute you and your anti-gay friends!

  11. Replies
    1. Snout, Rick Warren may be a Christian fundie, but it sounds from that article like he actually understands science. If he understands biology and atmospheric science over propaganda, power to him. We should support such pastors, particularly because their colleagues will put pressure on them to renounce their "heresy".

    2. "You completely missed the point of what I said. AIDS is a behavior-based disease... Of course, as a Christian and 4th generation Baptist pastor, I oppose all immorality, but to deny that the HIV virus is the cause of AIDS is still quack science...Knowing that AIDS is caused by HIV in no way condones immortality (sic). AIDS became a pandemic because people ignored God's Word, but the source of AIDS is HIV."

      - Rick Warren, in the comment thread of

      Bryan Fischer is clearly completely batshit insane - this is obvious to everyone except Duesberg. Personally, I find Rick Warren much creepier.

    3. If you want to see Rick Warren demonstrating understanding of biology, check this out:

      Naturalism & Evolutionism vs Creationism: Chuck Colson & Rick Warren

      Your head will explode.

    4. Arrgh, I made to about one minute thirty, and then I had to stop before I throttled my monitor. Snout, you win. I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

  12. Truthy:

    Celia has MANY problems. This was only one of them. Perhaps the time in the "love-frequency wave box" helped her in admitting her abject failure? Maybe she will ask for more donations to her website and get another whopping hundred bucks or so?

  13. According to Celia's site, there are a WHOPPING 11 "subscribers" to her blog. Incredible! Her site has now gone "viral" - pun intended!

    I do like the name though, "The Truth Barrier." As in, she is a barrier to truth.

  14. The time for the Denialists to appeal the judge's ruling against Farber/Clarkie ran out WEEKS ago. They are not appealing anything. More hot air from Clark/Farber when they lied initially about appealing the ruling against them.

    Liars, as usual.

  15. Kralc - maybe the HIV virus wiped out all Celia's subscribers?

  16. Of course Celia Farber was lying about her appeal. It was obvious from the judge's ruling that they did not have a leg to stand on.

    I bet Baker's bullshit OMSJ is not going to appeal the Andre Davis case either like he bleated on about when Davis was convicted.

    Baker, Farber et al are all liars!

    Baker's latest BS is about SCIENCE not retracting the original Gallo papers from 30 years ago. You remember about 3 years ago a bunch of AIDS Denialist crazies sent a demand letter to SCIENCE with all their very impressive signatures? Yeah, THAT letter!! hahahaaaaa

    1. Farber I understand. But her lawyer wrote such a hyperbolic press statement, that if he doesn't appeal, he will be the laughingstock of the entire world. The case will come back to haunt him for sure.

    2. The Appeal was filed last week.


    You gotta wonder, though. Why is it that whenever Rethinking AIDS publicity stunts fuck up so spectacularly (as they always do) they then call in Clark Baker to do damage control?

    It's like trying to clean crayon scribble off the wall using a soiled diaper.

  18. Soiled Diaper = Clark Baker! From now on, anytime I wanna refer to Clark Baker I'll just write Soiled Diaper. Oh, that's great.

  19. Snout - one of the entertaining parts of the link you put in was Clarkie posting in the comments section. Repeating the same old garbage, and citing his own site over and over. What a tool. What a disturbed, pathetic, sad, sad sack of shit.

  20. The ReThinking AIDS Facebook page can be quite interesting. Here someone has shown how the dissidents are all over the place on what they think. No wonder they are all such idiots. They don't have a solid "alternative" idea to what real science has proven. Of course he left off Deusberg's big bag of bullshit. Check it out:

    Ricci Davis
    ‎1. DeHarven says endogenous retroviruses exist and can account for particles in Motagnier's HIV EMs, only those particles are not HIV. Don;t ask how he can know that.
    2. Bauer says HIV doesn't exist, but he also claims that half of all HIV tests are false-positives, which means the other half must be true positives, i.e. HIV exists.
    3. Ruggiero says that HIV exists and can cause immune-deficiency, but is not the (only) cause of AIDS.
    See if you can get your dissident heads around that one.

    1. Truthy, and yet "Ricci Davis" is still convinced Clark Baker is a genius. At least he quotes him on his Facebook page, and in his youtube video. Get your non-dissident head around that one.

  21. I think referring to Clarkie as a "soiled diaper" gives him too much credibility.

  22. Aaahh.

    That I may breathe so deeply,

    And saviour,

    The sweet stench of your rotting paradigm.

  23. Check out my new post where I show just how little traffic Soiled Diaper's website gets. His Alexa Ranking is in the toilet. Seth, your site is the most popular among HIV/AIDS dissident related sites! Bauer is in third behind Barnett! Check it out:

  24. notElon:
    Clarkie IS a genius. When it comes to becoming a gigolo of a woman with 1 foot in the grave.

    In terms of anything that requires any education at all.....well Clarkie is then just a doughy retard.

    1. That was kinda my point. That Ricci Davis is as deluded as the rest of them.

  25. Who is that weirdo HansSelyeWasCorrect? He writes the same stuff over and over again and clearly pisses off Jonathan B at QA.

  26. What a strange, strange person.


    Rumor has it that Duesberg is set to make another media appearance on 8th February, according to "Rethinking AIDS media co-ordinator" Jason Erb on Facebook.

    Apparently Duesberg is going to be debating Radio Liberty host Stan Monteith, who claims that AIDS was created by the CIA as a bioweapon, and that Duesberg was one of the evil scientists involved in its development.

    This very special treat is scheduled for February 8 at 7 PM EST.

    Fingers crossed that Lenny Horowitz will call in to join the fun.

    "So, naturalists observe, a flea
    Has smaller fleas that on him prey;
    And these have smaller still to bite 'em,
    And so proceed ad infinitum."

    - Jonathan Swift (1733)

  28. That is really interesting. That would totally explain why Duesberg has refused to admit reality all these years. It is because Duesberg knows HIV is pathogenic because Duesberg himself created it for the CIA! Now that is some rational, logical, believable shit! You know Duesberg will deny it. He has to. Now I see said the blind man.

  29. Oh no! You guys saw through the masks we were wearing on the last Mission Impossible! Actually, I was Peter Duesberg in disguise, working with my trusted sidekick Clarkie! Yes, Bond, Bourne, Maxwell Smart- we are all really Clarkie/Duesberg in disguise. Now that the operation is blown, we have been disavowed. We will have to go back to the Keystone Kops.

    Yes, Duesberg was are ultimate mole. He pretends to deny AIDS, so that he can infiltrate the inner circle of the denialists. Then, he spreads ignorance so he can spread AIDS. He has been working for the pharmaceutical industry all along! The whole thing was a false flag operation.

    1. I must say Clarkie's cover is perfect. Even with the Professional Helicopter Piloting ad the Special Police Training, I would never be able to hear "Baker. Clark Baker," without cracking up.

  30. notElonJan 16, 2012 10:09 PM
    I think some of them are certainly mentally unstable. Look at my and Snout's "debate" with Andy Lindsay in the previous thread. ...unquote....

    Mentally unstable the new phrase for someone who found out theyd had 25 years of their life robbed from then is it ?
    Heres a wee something to consider why id be a bit pissed off (mentally unstable).

    In 1998 , after suffering from adverse reactions to Abacavir , DMP 266 and Didanosene , the doctors gave me a diagnosis of full blown stage 4 Aids. Funny thing was , looking on the﻿ CDC hiv clasification of stage 4 full blown Aids , i had none of the aids defining conditions. I only realised this two weeks ago while going over my hospital files. So im reckoning by now i should be a long time dead , go figure WHY ive got my health back after nearly losing my life to the drugs that were givin the marketing authority based on an "opinion" !

    So its allright to deny that non specific tests dont dont test for HIV and the pills were never tested on a virus and that the EM photograph was "Probably" something after declaring it was nothing , but as soon as the minority point out to you the facts we suddenly become the deniers ?

    You lot really are the denialists ...

    Andy Lindsay (alive thanks to quitting drugs that cause life threatening "conditions" )

    1. No, mentally unstable because you threatened me with violence, can't spell your own doctor's name, and think real life is the X-Files. You will notice I didn't cite your AIDS denial as a reason.

  31. Since you lot are so cock sure of your HIV causation of AIDS , why dont any of you testify in prosecutions ?

    Exactly , you dont have any proof :-)))

    1. 1) Because I am not a lawyer. Unlike Clark, I let the true experts handle these things. As a p
      2) I don't need to. I recall Clark Baker testified at that last trial, and it didn't go too well for him.

    2. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to LiteratureFebruary 11, 2012 at 6:28 PM

      Baker doesn't understand that prosecution witnesses are recruited by the prosecution team, not by him. Baker and Reality are not close acquaintances...

      AIDS denialists have always fantasized about one day having their delusions proven in courts or official hearings.

      To keep the dream alive they write unreadable fiction novels about this, such as Steven Davis' turgid The AIDS Trial or David Rasnick's Germ of Lies.

      Even Valendar Turner has a manuscript gathering dust in a desk drawer:

      "It's a novel. A thriller (42) set in the US and Australia. About a biotechnology company trying to bump off an AIDS dissident because the Chairman of the Board perceives a huge threat to company profits. The story is woven around a Professor of Chemistry, a lady of course, and an HIV positive haemophiliac boy with a skeptical, politician uncle. There are several conversations and a court scene where our view of HIV and AIDS is aired."

      42. Turner VF. The Dawn of Reckoning. Unpublished 1997.

  32. My expertise is in Physical Chemistry, and I only have a BA in that at this point. Unlike Clark Baker and Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, I have the humility to realize I am not qualified to testify in court. I leave the job to those wiser and older than me. And they do a fine Job. I recall that Clark and Eleni recently made asses of themselves in the court of law. Clearly we have experts enough...

    However my degree is enough for me to say that the EM photographs exist. I have seen them. It is enough for me to know the binding mechanism between reverse transcriptase and an inhibitor, and it is enough for me to read through the literature and realize HIV probably exists.

  33. I'll testify, Clark, if you will start providing proof as to exactly how you were beneficial to the cases you list at your website.

  34. Anon (aka Clarkie) - people don't need to "testify". The science is clear. You should really consider getting a college education (in addition to your top-secret-agent security clearance, kung-fu black belt and advanced certificate in gigolo-ing.

  35. Constable Clarkie:

    I'll testify. Just publicly post another picture of yourself in a hawaiian moo-moo.

  36. Ill testify too , that the original test i took in 1986 wasnt to be used as a diagnostic test , that the doctors believed it was , that the next test i took was to detect virus and that it came up negative three times and the doctors never told me(sinister to say the least) and that i spelled the doctors name correctly (for your information notTHATclever even with your degree).

    As for your failed demolition of clarkie baker above , you will if you look find that the HIV experts admitted under oath and penalty of perjury that they were not experts. The fact that clarkie bakers team failed to get a not guilty at that trial was because the Statutory Act in that state stated that if the defendent accepted what he was told then he was guilty.

    In common law which deals with criminality , a defendant is pressumed innocent until proven guilty of a crime. In all statutory offences , one must have to prove that you were innocent.
    How on earth can someone prove they are innocent of being told you had HIV when you dont if someone wrote it down on a bit of paper that you belived to be true and that there is no definitive test for ?

    So it was not clarkie who failed that man, it was the state and their man made laws. Had they bothered to listen to the evidence given by the prosecution witnesess , or lack of it , the jury would have cleared the defendant. But oh no , because the state had written up a statutory Act and the man couldnt prove he hadnt read a bit of paper , he was found guilty.

    The very fact that the jury were mislead by one mans words which were formed on an opinion of a bit of paper were the fact this man was found guilty.

    No more.No less.

    Andy Lindsay , not mentaly unstable , but a wee bit brighter than you lot here. And if you felt threatened , it serves you right for destroying millions of lives.

    1. So first you say you could win for sure. Then you say that the law is out to get you. Which is it?

  37. OH, I remember the Great Moo-Moo Debate at D4D. Remember the picture of Baker next to the big, fat drag queen, Shirley Q. Liquor? I believe Baker lost. Of course he is a loser at everything.

  38. Anonymous, you are quite mistaken. You are obviously discussing the Andre Davis trial and the only expert was not impugned by defense. Quite the contrary. You need to follow up on what Clark Baker says and NOT take his word for truth. He is a fraud and a liar as I have painstakingly detailed at my site.

    As for your claim that you took 3 subsequent tests that were negative and your "doctor never told you" is rubbish, I believe. Why would a doctor not tell a patient that information? Sinister, as you say? Come on Mr. Paranoid. You can do better than that.

  39. This is a bit long, but well worth the read because it is HILARIOUS! Those bastions for intelligence at are trying to put together a "scientific study" or what they consider one any way. Can you find the major flaw in the design? Consider the fact that "each member" is to complete the survey. See #2. How are they going to fill out the survey if dead? Also, if you look at and see their other informal surveys (not meaning this very scientific study they are proposing here) you will see that on average, they have 12 to 14 respondents. WOW, such a sample size. It also shows just how few members really has! ENJOY!

    Here is an idea for a small scientific study on this board:

    review membership and identify all members who have been on this board for 3, 5, 7, 10 or more years.

    Have each member fill in an anonymous survey about their health & living conditions.

    Questions to be answered:

    1 How many board members became seriously ill?
    2 How many died?
    3 How many are well?

    It would then be interesting to compare the QA group survey outcome with mean mortality figures from the general public.

    Are QA board members dying in larger or lower numbers?

    If not - there is more evidence that HIV does not cause AIDS
    If yes - then this still does not proof that HIV is the cause. At best we a follow up survey needs to exclude other causes:

    1 ARV medication
    2 drug abuse
    3 accumulation of STD's due to high number of sexual partners
    4 diet
    5 caught in the AIDS trap

    Current mean mortality rate according to the CDC among HIV+ individuals is about the same as for HIV- individuals. Previous discussions on this board contain the relevant links.

    For researchers: this board could well be worth a small paper; there is enough information available via long term board members such as myself who have been posting for many years, still alive and well.

    Evidence that mainstream science simply cannot ignore.

  40. What happened to D4D?

    1. Yes,you should bring D4D back,JTD,it was a fine blog


    When you Google "Clark Baker" - the second result is the AIDSTruth article on him being an "ex cop and homophobic right wing blogger."

    However, if you click on that link, it takes you to a spam site, although the real pages still exists.

    Apparently, the page was bugging Clarkie, so he hired a service to try an get the link down.

    Make sure that AIDSTruth is aware of his attempts to take the article down off the Internet.

    You can verify this by Googling "Clark Baker" and clicking on the AIDSTruth search result.

    At least we know that Clark is bothered with the truth coming out. But AIDSTruth should be aware that their search results are being interfered with.

  42. is trying to get donations for some new software. They only need $500 bucks and they have an "anonymous" donor who will match they really only need $250. Now please tell me why a group that is supposedly as large as can't get to a measly 500 bucks on it's own? has bragged many times about how large their group is, but all signs have pointed in the past to this being untrue.

    For example, every time they run a Poll, they only have a dozen or so respondents. Their recent Poll, "Are Syphilis and HIV False Constructs?" only had 12 people participate.

    Their Facebook page only has 79 Likes!! That is pitiful especially when considering FB is such a mammoth social networking site!

    Now they only have 3 donors so far pony up money for their new software. But of course, since most of the readers at have admitted that they live off of Government Assistance, despite being admittedly (supposedly ) healthy, it is no wonder they need some "anonymous" donor to match their pitiful funds!

    They are really not fooling anyone except themselves into believing that they are a large, influential group.

  43. Bring back D4D! The denialists hated it and Todd's repartee is sorely missed.

  44. It is like Clarkie trying to fool people he is an intelligent person with more social status than a rusty anal speculum. It is more humorous than accurate.

  45. Who's Listening to your garbage?February 21, 2012 at 4:45 AM

    I guess it's a bit like how with all that consensus and thousands of scientists at your fingertips we keep getting the same tired old pseudonyms, trolls and sock puppets defending the AIDS empire.

    And unlike AIDSTRUTH Q.A doesn't have the benefit of all that pharmadosh nor the university funded resources of this hack blog either.

    P.S. apart from D4D what happened to Reckless Endangerment as well?

    You clowns continue to give me a good laugh on a daily basis, especially pseudo-toad the psychotic blogger.

  46. I find it funny how med students view the so called denialists, they know only what their taught about AIDS, which ain't much!
    There is no such thing as any virology professor who has never heard of what people here refer to as being an "AIDS denialist", the professor would have to be teaching in a cave somewhere you idiot!
    Even more ignorant, med students are made to actually believe that the A.I.D.S. virus dropped out the ass end of a cow screwing green monkey! lol AIDS, the story of the monkey that screwed the cow that screwed the chicken that screwed the cat that ate the rat that lived in house that "supaflyrobby" built! Thank God,no film at eleven.

    1. I have no idea where you get your info anonymous, as no one I know says HIV is from cows or green monkeys. But zoonotic viruses like, say, SARS and Ebola and Bird Flu are major public health threats. Poo-pooing the obvious only makes your ignorance even more blindly apparent.

      Clearly your knowledge ain't so much either.

    2. So, I guess they must be saying sheep then ? No wait! I know what their saying! Chimpanzees, correct ?
      It has just got to be chimps! Subtype-O done started it all! Is that it ?
      As far as viruses going zoonotic goes, please keep in mind that SARS and influenza are both either "beyond any doubt" airborne agents as is the case with influenza, or something at that is at least known to aerosol in some way, as is the case with SARS. The filoviruses Ebola and Marburg are highly infectious by the airborne route in the lab, Marburg’s host animal is the African cave dwelling Egyptian Fruit Bat, the virus can surely aerosol in a cave setting, traveling within droplets falling from cave ceilings and infect unsuspecting persons via that route. Some scientists are completely sold that person-to-person spread of these agents requires direct contact with an infected persons body fluids, both while incubating, as well as after they begin presenting with the disease, I don't subscribe to that view.
      There were a handful of people that were infected with the Zaire strain of Ebola virus who became what’s known as "Super Contagious" within just a few days after they first began presenting with obvious symptoms of infection with that virus.
      In other words….the virus became airborne and infected others just as if it were being spun in a centrifuge under BSL- 4 lab conditions, except there were no BSL- 4 measures being practiced by those who were caring for the patients, they wore only gloves, gowns and surgical masks, a practice called “barrier nursing.”
      The AIDS viruses are blood-borne agents, meaning the viruses are not airborne, nor do they aerosol, they must enter the blood stream by some means in-order for zoonosis even to occur in the first place, since animals like chimps and monkeys “gay or straight” have never been known to have anal sex or share needles with humans…. how would you purpose this zoonosis you speak of to actually have taken place in the case of HIV?
      Please don’t say “bushmeat” either, because the sheep/ lonely shepherd’s hypothesis would make far greater sense.

    3. Either of those two hypotheses do a fine job of explaining zoonoses, I think. I won't speculate on when this happened.

      The genetic evidence shows that HIV-1 is most similar to a chimp virus. HIV-2 is most similar to a virus found in sooty mangabies. And various other SIVs have been found among humans in Africa. So the transfer of a virus from one to the other happened many times. The strain that became HIV-1 just happened to be highly infectious to humans.

    4. However, as I have already said, no retrovirus is airborne, the virus must enter a person’s blood in some possible way.
      Pygmies of equatorial Africa have been butchering and eating monkeys and chimps for an incalculable amount of years, you would most certainly think that in the process of all the hunting and butchering of countless amounts of these animals over the course of all those years that many of them would have cut themselves and made blood to blood contact during the butchering process more than just a few times already, wouldn’t you? Common sense should also dictate that the pygmies would have also been involved in countless amounts of skirmishes with the various primates that they hunted, I would think that it would have been quite routine for many of them to have been bitten and scratched, at least every now and then, wouldn’t you agree? Even though many scientists took all that just about for granted that many of those people would be found to test positive….there was not even a single one tested who was found to be infected with either HIV-1, or HIV- 2? The lots of the blood samples were first taken in the late 70’s before any AIDS virus was known to exist, and then taken and tested yet again in the mid to late 80’s after a virus was found. How could that be the case when all these simians seem to have some sort of retroviral infection that fits some mainstreamer’s description of HIV/SIV? Have you ever heard of any of this?
      Seems Strange doesn’t it? Do you have any ideas on how the most obvious candidate’s in Africa for an infection of this type just up and avoided it all completely?
      When you get done mulling that over, you may just as well ponder this one also- Scientists have been using simians of all kinds in their lab work since just about day one, retroviruses have been known for decades, becoming all the rage in the 60’s and 70’s, how would you explain the SIV’s being discovered after HIV? Perhaps, scientists in labs all over the world just never noticed that their lab animals that came from Africa or Southeast Asia dying of AIDS all around them? Maybe? Could be? Any ideas on how all of these lab monkeys and apes could have possibly fell victim to all of the various subtypes of this ancient killer retroviruses and just die of simian AIDS right under the noses of not just the researchers, but their handlers as well, and nobody noticed? I find that quite odd, don't you?
      The chimpanzee virus you reference is known as SIVcpz, its supposed HIV-1 counterpart is known as ANT-70 and is said to have come from the subtype-O “or clade” of HIV-1, both can only be found in Cameroon. This actually only means something to all the hacks collecting paychecks for dancing with the things, because sheep and cows are in-fact where it’s all really at when it comes to human AIDS. I wasn’t exactly surprised when you informed me that nobody that you know ever mentioned them in the same sentence with AIDS.
      My next statement leads to my final question.
      HIV-2 is SIVmac! Any idea what else it is? Databases don’t mention it, because the name of this game is full blown “complication”, know that.

  47. notElon:
    I see that your in the Israeli military.
    Your country is in a very hairy situation with very few options,I most certainly wish you and everyone else there all the best.
    I'm not ignorant,I'm also no stranger to virology.
    I must say that you sparked my interest indeed, where do the people you know say that the AIDS virus is from, if not from monkeys or cows?

  48. There was a recent study done on bushmeat hunters which found that many were in fact exposed to a wide range of blood-borne simian viruses.

    But you say HIV exists and doesn't within the same sentence. I cannot understand you.

    Are you one of those crazy people who believe Duesberg created HIV-1 by crossbreeding different varieties of SIVs and then injecting them into hapless Africans?

    1. "Are you one of those crazy people who believe Duesberg created HIV-1 by crossbreeding different varieties of SIVs and then injecting them into hapless Africans?"

      You're close, notElon.

      He's been posting his word salads on Questioning AIDS for a while now, but I think they've now decided he's too crazy even for them.

      He is into Rife Machines.

      He claims to have eradicated HIV from four AIDS patients using one of these special zappers, but unfortunately their health didn't get any better.

      So obviously this proves that HIV can't be the real cause of AIDS. The real cause is a different US bioweapon.

      Madder than several buckets of rattlesnakes.

  49. Ha ha , that fucked you notelton but notthatclevereither.

    Andy Lindsay.

  50. "sheep and cows are in-fact where it’s all really at when it comes to human AIDS."

    Really? Which bovine or ovine lentivirus is closer phylogenetically to HIV-1 than SIVcpz is?

    "HIV-2 is SIVmac! Any idea what else it is? Databases don’t mention it, because the name of this game is full blown 'complication', know that."

    *makes popcorn*

  51. Yes, Andy. Say something rambling, stupid, and nonsensical enough, and you can give me a brainfreeze.

    Congratulations. But generally, it is not something to strive for.

  52. You viewed what I said as "rambling, stupid, and nonsensical?" And your actually blaming your bout with "brainfreeze" on me and what I said/the questions I directed at you?
    Well…other than the explanation you put forth regarding your recurring bouts with “brainfreeze,
    I view your problem as having another possible cause altogether.
    I postulate that your so called "brainfreeze" was simply just a product of the last brainwashing that you incurred at the hands of your bleeding heart, mainstream backing pals here at the church that Seth built,combine that with a sudden drop in temperature while your head was still dripping wet with their convoluted logic and drugstore knowledge of science, and bam! There’s the true cause of your “brainfreeze!"

    If anything you should be thanking me, because what I said up there should have caused a direct thawing of your grey matter, allowing for your gears to turn, it shouldn’t have caused any seizing of those gears.
    How else could one explain the clouds of smoke that must have been billowing out of your ears and out from under your thinking-cap other than it being a direct result of my posts leading to those questions that I asked?

    1. Of course, I viewed what you said as rambling, stupid, and nonsensical. It was.

      Stupid, because as I said there were studies done showing that butchering can indeed transmit bloodborne pathogens. Rambling, because you drone on and on with no paragraph breaks, stopping only to threaten me and my family with torture.

      And nonsensical, because you deny the existence of HIV-1, while asserting a nearly identical retrovirus exists in other species. Hence my statement. "But you say HIV exists and doesn't within the same sentence. I cannot understand you." Instead of clarifying, you said "Ha ha , that fucked you notelton but notthatclevereither." I could write in word salads and be completely unintelligible also, but it does nothing to disseminate my viewpoint.

      And once again, it is notELON. It's seven freaking letters, and it has appeared half a million times on your computer screen by now. Can you make even a token effort at courtesy?

  53. Your case has now apparently progressed from "brainfreeze" to an even clearer-cut case of straight-up brain flatchulence.
    It appears as if you have somehow managed to intertwine the post I directed at you with a post that was directed at you by a one Mr. Andy Lindsay?
    You even responded to Mr. Lindsay's post on the very same day, 3-1-12?
    I most certainly never threatened you and your family with anything, let alone “torture”, of all things. Your obvious confusion may one day actually net you a diagnosis of “AIDS dementia” from your medical school compadres here on this site and beyond, so be careful, and quit assuming. I’m not Mr. Lindsay.
    So,you say that there were recent studies done showing that “butchering” can indeed transmit bloodborne pathogens?
    Those “after the fact” studies you speak of regarding “butchering” and SIV don’t actually mean squat, I don’t even know why you would think they actually would? Blood to blood contact can indeed transmit bloodborne agents, most certainly, hence- the term “bloodborne”?
    If there were no AIDS viruses found in blood samples taken from way rural African pygmies in the late 70’s, and then taken and tested yet again in the mid 80’s, is that so difficult for you to grasp? Those people have co-existed in the AIDS belt with just about every single monkey and ape known to man, yet none were found to be infected?
    Next- All of those simians were on their breakfast, lunch, and dinner menus for thousands of years, perhaps you believe that maybe they trained their dinner guests to “butcher” themselves? It was also, and still is, quite common for them to keep the babies as pets after they killed a nursing mother, no zoonosis on that front either? The study was made public at the “Second International Conference on AIDS”, which was held in Paris on June 23-25, 1986.

    There is however a huge difference between the rural peoples of Africa and the urbanized ones that you see on T.V. driving around and in the backs of pick-up trucks heading out to the bush to butcher monkeys and apes wearing old Super Bowl and World Series T-shirts touting the teams that actually lost those games as the actual winners. Those people are westernized, they just about all believe that medicine only come’s squirting out the head of a needle, “Hint! Hint!” while on the other hand, the rural peoples do not.
    You also asked me if I where one of those crazy people who believes that somebody made AIDS in a lab?
    Well, on that front!
    I return this question to you- Are you one of the worlds big thinkers who actually believes that a gay French flight attendant “patient zero” just about single handedly fucked the entire continent of North America? The CDC hopes you are.

    1. Anonymous, you need to understand that not all the readers of this blog are mental health professionals, and it can sometimes be confusing trying to distinguish between the different brands of Batshit Crazy - especially when you are all posting under the same moniker of "Anonymous". It can all become a bit of a blur after a while.

      So here's an idea: why not make up a pseudonym? That way your posts are less likely to be mixed up with those of a different wingnut.

  54. Anonymous, I am typing this slowly for you, so you will understand.


    Err... no. Almost all of the AIDS in humans today is caused by HIV-1 group M. There are far less common causes of AIDS, including HIV-1 groups O (the next most common) N, and P, together with several different major strains of HIV-2.

    Of the 50 or 60 million humans ever infected with HIV-1 group M, every one of them except the first was infected by another human. The only person who wasn't infected by another human was infected by a chimpanzee carrying a form of SIVcpz.

    If, as you say, pygmies are regularly in contact with the blood of non-human primates, then it is very possible that some might occasionally get infected with primate retroviruses. And - actually - there is evidence that they do.

    But none of these viruses will be HIV-1 group M (the main cause of AIDS worldwide). You can only get HIV-1 group M from a human.

    Note: one of the members of the pygmy family in the 2011 study above was infected with HTLV-3. This is not HIV - it is the name of a recently discovered deltaretrovirus related to HTLV-1 and HTLV-2. HTLV-III was briefly the name given to the virus we now know as HIV during the mid 1980s. HTLV-3 is in a completely different genus of retroviruses.


    Firstly, Gaëtan Dugas - whom I assume you are referring to - was not French. He was Canadian, born in Quebec City.

    Second, no moderately informed person - including anyone in the CDC - thinks that Dugas "just about single handedly fucked the entire continent of North America."

    Anonymous, I have only the vaguest idea who you are, and I can't promise not to mistake you for one of the other anonymous morons who post bizarre strawman arguments on the discussion threads of Seth's blog. But am I right in thinking you might be someone sucked into Charles Geshekter's Black Hole of Stupid?

  55. i want to share a testimony, my names are Natalya Yuliya i,m from Tsentralnaya Ulitsa in Russia. i was diagnose of HIV/AIDS in 2010, when i slept with a man in an hotel, along Ulitsa street. i wept throughout the day when i was told i was HIV positive i wanted to commit suicide because i was upset.
    i was taking some anti-HIV drugs to keep me stable of not dieing, i saw several testimonies that people gave concerning how a man call dr shant tami heal there HIV/AIDS, i contacted him to help me and he told me to get some spiritual items, i did according to what he ask me and he woke me up about 11:59 and cast the healing spell and send me something to used, two days later he told me to diagnose my self again in any hospital, i went to different hospitals and the all gave me the same result that i,m HIV/AIDS negative. this man is really the best healer you can think of my mouth is full of testimony, what the doctors and the rest can not cure he cured it. dr shant tami is so real. you can contact dr shant tami via: INDIANSPELL@YAHOO.COM

    you can reach me Natalya Yuliya if you want to know more.
    via: email-natalya2yuliya2002@gmail .com
    phone number-+79260032872