Last summer when Thomas DeLorenzo lamented that Ryan White wasn’t around to lobby for ObamaCare, it was hard not to choke on his words. After all, Ryan would be alive today if individuals like Robert Gallo MD and Martin Delaney hadn’t convinced his mother to poison him with AZT.
Ryan White (1971-1990) died from AZT toxicity
If alive, Ryan would be as terrifying as Lindsay Nagel, the toddler who appears in the new documentary House of Numbers. Like Ryan, Lindsay was diagnosed as HIV+ during the 1990s and, according to her highly trained medical experts, would soon die. But when her parents interrupted her AIDS medication after 22 months, her symptoms immediately subsided and – despite repeated threats from clinicians that she would not survive kindergarten – Lindsay and Karri Stokely have touched audiences around the US for having survived drugs that killed Ryan, Martin Delany, Hank Wilson, Ferd Eggan, Joyce Hafford, Belynda Dunn, Joe Carroccio, George Sanderson, Howard Jacobs and thousands of other allegedly HIV+ patients and activists.
For gay activists and unethical researchers, Ryan’s death helped to promote the myth of heterosexual AIDS. As the Dulcinea of HIV, researchers and activists used Ryan’s death to attack, as denialists, anyone who questioned the wisdom of redirecting billions of research dollars away from America’s leading causes of death toward meth addicts, drug companies, universities and the CDC (i.e. PharmaSluts).
Like Daniel Kuritzkes, John Moore and others who signed this statement, DeLorenzo attacked a documentary he never saw. Like sunlight to vampires, House of Numbers threatens those who rely on tax revenues that are wasted on what film exposes as tragic but statistically irrelevant (chart) consequence of self-destructive behavior that never threatened more than a tiny population of promiscuous gay meth addicts.
Having arrested, physically examined, tested and prosecuted more than 2500 drug addicts, I understand the self-destructive lifestyle better than most. Whether one believes that HIV is real or not, the documentary’s explosive revelations offer a compelling argument that there’s too much money in AIDS to consider a cure.
While a cure appeals to AVERT activists, epidemiologist Walt Senterfitt PhD struggles with how to exaggerate AIDS statistics that peaked at 0.015 percent in 1995 and fell the moment clinicians reduced the levels of AZT given to patients. It also explains why they continue to inexplicably celebrate the ADR-related deaths of Eliza Jane and her mother.
Lindsay Nagel poses with Prof. Peter Duesberg at the opening of House of Numbers (2009)
Although Americans understand the problem with hiring gangsters as policemen or pedophiles as scoutmasters, the idea that US healthcare policy and statistics can be influenced by avowed anti-capitalist social revolutionaries represents a larger threat than HIV ever did.
As a CHAMP co-Chair, the mission of this CDC and LA County Health Department epidemiologist is to:
… attack the root causes of the epidemic such as poverty, homophobia and racism; and to sustain and expand our movements for justice.
As implausible as HIV/AIDS causation is, the idea that retroviruses engage in the racial, homophobic and economic profiling requires another theological stretch of the imagination. But if we consider that the CDC’s Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention (DHAP) exaggerates estimates to justify the $653 million spent in 2008 to employ 442 full-time bureaucrats, advisors, analysts and 163 contractors plus 43 other employees to poison thousands like Martin Delany, Ferd Eggan, Joyce Hafford and Howard Jacobs to ostensibly save an insignificant number of self-destructive meth addicts, audiences appreciate what makes House of Numbers so provocative and the PharmaSluts so nervous. The fact that infectious disease has been statistically irrelevant since 1955 makes one wonder what justifies the CDC’s $8.8 billion budget today.
It’s also no surprise that Luc Montagnier MD and James Chin, MD MPH parted ways with the most outrageous characters of the film.
From what Donald Francis initially claimed “kills everything,” Montagnier concluded:
Montagnier: We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected… our immune system will get rid of the virus within a few weeks if you have a good immune system.
Brent Leung: If you have a good immune system then your body can naturally get rid of HIV?
Montagnier: Yes.
Brent Leung: If you take a poor African who’s been infected and you build up her immune system is it also possible for them to also naturally get rid of it?
Montagnier: I would think so…
While the lamestream media slept through Montagnier’s CURE FOR AIDS, the usual suspectstp accused the filmmaker of tricking the world-acclaimed scientist. In response, Leung posted this additional clip, which added:
Montagnier: I would think so… It’s important knowledge, which is completely neglected. People always think of drugs and vaccine.
Brent Leung: There’s no money in nutrition, right?
Montagnier: There’s no profit, yes.
Still, this wasn’t enough for the pharmaceutical lawyers who ghostwrote Jeanne Bergman’s revised arguments. Although they acknowledge that the “discoverer of HIV” is “clearly not a denialist,” the lawyers that defend drugs like Benoxaprofen and Vioxx used Bergman’s rent-a-PhD to claim Leung “sucker-punched” Montagnier with “leading questions.”
If we accept that a 20-year-old film student fooled the planet’s most esteemed HIV scientist, Bergman’s ghostwriters fail to explain how he fooled the documentary’s entire cast – or whether Leung fooled Moore and the others into lying or telling the truth. And if none of the Grand Dragons of HIV noticed that they were being sucker-punched by the soft-spoken film student, why are Americans still spending billions for them to figure out how a retrovirus that kills millions can do so without the AMA or South African statisticians even noticing?
Bergman’s ghostwriter’s allege:
Montagnier: No Denial of HIV as the Cause of AIDS
- Conversation out of context.
- Sucker-punched by Leung.
- Leung asked leading questions.
- Montagnier’s English imperfect.
- Montagnier eccentric – but NOT a denialist.
Scientists Denounce House of Numbers
Bergman’s ghostwriters composed this statement weeks before the film’s release.
Sonnabend blogged his outrage on POZ. Without the pharmaceutical ads, that magazine would collapse for the same reason that superior publications like the Messenger, The Native and Christopher Street collapsed. Simply stated, if you question the Grand Dragons, the advertisements and funding disappear.
Kuritzkes forgot about the AMA’s report on integrity. If he was a NASCAR we wouldn’t see the paint:
- Consulting Fees from Abbott Laboratories; Avexa Limited; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; Gilead Sciences Medical Affairs; GlaxoSmithKline; Human Genome Sciences, Inc.; Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Koronis Pharmaceuticals; Merck & Co., Inc.; Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Monogram Biosciences, Inc.; Oncolys BioPharma Inc.; Panacos Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Pfizer Inc.; Roche Laboratories Inc.; Schering-Plough Corporation; Siemens AG; Trimeris, Inc.; Virostatics, srl; and VIRxSYS Corporation.
- Grant/Research Support from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Gilead Sciences Medical Affairs; Human Genome Sciences, Inc.; Merck & Co., Inc.; Roche Laboratories Inc.; Schering-Plough Corporation; and Trimeris, Inc.
- Honoraria from Abbott Laboratories; Avexa Limited; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Bristol-yers Squibb Company; Gilead Sciences Medical Affairs; GlaxoSmithKline; Human Genome Sciences, Inc.; Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Koronis Pharmaceuticals; Merck & Co., Inc.; Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Monogram Biosciences, Inc.; Oncolys BioPharma Inc.; Panacos Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Pfizer Inc.; Roche Laboratories Inc.; Schering-Plough Corporation; Siemens AG; Virostatics; and VIRxSYS Corporation.
This is in addition to the $22 million Kuritzkes received in other reported grants.
During the past 20 years, Daniel Kuritzkes MD has received more than $22 million in questionable and under-reported HIV funding. That number is much higher.
Having worked with more hundreds of attorneys on thousands of criminal and civil cases since 1980, I would coach Niel Constantine and Robin Weiss to say exactly what they said.
Dr. Constantine works for Robert Gallo, as did this aspiring security guard and filter salesman who investigated Robert Gallo’s scientific misconduct for Robert Gallo. On a related note, the security guard is now being investigated for conducting an investigation without a license.
Dr. Weiss’ arguments about co-factors were part of the hijinks. He fails to explain why he thinks co-factors are important and Robert Gallo does not. Then again, I’m not sure why Gallo and those who disagreed with him onscreen were upset. Science is not about consensus.
All in all, Brent Leung’s documentary hits a home run simply because he allows the scientists to speak for themselves. It is the most important documentary on scientific corruption since Jeffrey Wigand PhD exposed the tobacco industry. We’ll just have to wait for the pharmaceutical insider.
Until then, who will we believe – multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical companies that routinely settle criminal and civil cases for billions of dollars OR those that don’t beleive every commercial and glossy ad that we see? For this investigator, the answer isn’t nearly as hard as Bergman’s lawyers would have us believe.
***Coming Dec 1 on World AIDS Day – Something BIG.***
Luc Montagnier’s interview:
House of Numbers trailer:
Coming to a film festival near you.
… attack the root causes of the epidemic such as poverty, homophobia and racism; and to sustain and expand our movements for justice.
NOTE: While PharmaSlut is regretfully used to identify the financially symbiotic influence between activists, universities, researchers, marketing executives and pharmaceutical lobbyists who promote deadly drugs like Benoxaprofen, AZT, Sustiva and SSRIs to the detriment of public health, Denialist is routinely used by John P. Moore PhD and pharmaceutically-funded propagandists like this and this to attack the understandably skeptical. That clinicians cannot police themselves a decade after the Wazana Report – and that Eli Lilly and Pfizer recently paid billions to settle criminal and civil liabilities – skepticism is justified.