Comments on The Padian Waffle!TypePad2006-08-10T05:04:52ZOtishttps://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2006/08/more_on_african/comments/atom.xml/Gene Semon commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550776c8688342006-08-16T16:15:47Z2008-02-22T08:49:22ZGene SemonAnother quite "comprehensible" way to put it, consistent with Peter Duesberg's molecular assessment(no cell-free transmission): No, absolutely zero evidence of...<p>Another quite "comprehensible" way to put it, consistent with Peter Duesberg's molecular assessment(no cell-free transmission): No, absolutely zero evidence of heterosexual (or MTC for that matter), transmission of a "viral load"; given the known structural instability of the so-called virions, it is biologically impausible. </p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55077696a88342006-08-13T01:32:32Z2008-02-22T08:48:40ZGeorgeMr. Pontiac, What model are you may I ask? I just checked the link you provided, expecting to find an...<p>Mr. Pontiac,</p>
<p>What model are you may I ask? I just checked the link you provided, expecting to find an abstract at least of the paper whose findings you confidently reported, and to discover that like the Padian paper one needs to actually read what is written in the body to learn what the researchers actually did and found. I was perfectly willing to chalk this up to one more instance of the sloppy scholarship of those who would rather die than admit the NIH and Pasteur and Wellcome Trust and CDC and WHO might be a bit mistook in their 25 years of global pandemic death doom and destruction.</p>
<p>But it was worse than that man with the moniker of an automobile running on one cylinder and 4 flat tires, the link opens on the NEJ online registration page and even were I to take advantage of their FREE offer of limited access to special papers 6 motnhs old or older, I would not have been able to discover whether this was among the specials since you gave no bibliographic citation.</p>
<p>When I was a university professor if any student had dared to follow instructions as plain as the ones I issued you with such contempt, they would have been thrown out of my class with no discussion and no reprieve. </p>
<p>And so: To the junk heap with you.<br />
</p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550635a8388332006-08-12T23:49:44Z2008-02-22T08:50:34ZGeorgeThank you Dr. Brown. Mea culpas. 1. I was too lazy and enjoying my grandchildren too much to take any...<p>Thank you Dr. Brown. Mea culpas. 1. I was too lazy and enjoying my grandchildren too much to take any additional time to read the link Pontiac sent and since it appeared to be from a NEJ paper, and reported precise rates, I assumed the rates were representative of what the Pontiac wished them to be. </p>
<p>A little while ago, as I was trying to take a well deserved nap, I did some "back of the envelope" mental calculations using the 1 per 1000 figure as a real value and a million infections and assuming a million encounters per week, and could not produce anything except the most pitiful arithmetically increasing number of infections, which I knew could not represent anywhere near the number of herpes cases in the O so promiscuous USofA. I was disturbed and about to adjust my previous comment about that rate x a *lot* of infections and therefore a lot of contacts could easy transmission make. Now that I see how the study was done, I can return to my nap time without losing my few remaining marbles, and only need mea culpa 2, that my instant "quantitative" explanation was made of fluff, and not the 'fluff' that dreams are made of :). </p>
<p>None of this of course does anything to make the meta-statistical, invented rates of Padian any more reliable. </p>Darin Brown commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550635d3288332006-08-12T23:19:06Z2008-02-22T08:52:30ZDarin Brownhttp://www.reviewingaids.org/awiki/index.php/User:RevolverI don't remember precisely, but the particular study I read said they strongly counselled all participants to abstain from intercourse...<p>I don't remember precisely, but the particular study I read said they strongly counselled all participants to abstain from intercourse during outbreaks, which is of course the very time when it is easiest to transmit HSV-2, way easier than during asymptomatic periods.</p>
<p>I have read that</p>
<p>(a) 50 million Americans over age 20 have antibodies to HSV-2</p>
<p>(b) ***When couples abstain from intercourse during outbreaks***, the annual risk of transmission is roughly 5-10%</p>
<p>The conclusion seems pretty obvious to me: a lot of people have sex during outbreaks. Big surprise.</p>Darin Brown commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550776aeb88342006-08-12T22:44:33Z2008-02-22T08:48:57ZDarin Brownhttp://www.reviewingaids.org/awiki/index.php/User:RevolverI seem to remember this particular herpes paper coming up at aetiology several months ago. It's one they love to...<p>I seem to remember this particular herpes paper coming up at aetiology several months ago. It's one they love to bring out to confuse people. Do a google search for her site and the thread will probably come up.</p>
<p>This is a typical example of "you don't believe pigs can fly just because someone tells you pigs can fly". If HSV-2 were really this difficult to transmit, there never would have been an actual herpes outbreak in the US.</p>
<p>I remember the first time this article was mentioned at aetiology, it blew my mind. Pigs can't fly, people.</p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e5506354bf88332006-08-12T21:53:49Z2008-02-22T08:48:37ZGeorgeI need no calculator, nor does anyone else, nor any knowledge of statistics to answer your 'question' Pontiac. If HSV-2...<p>I need no calculator, nor does anyone else, nor any knowledge of statistics to answer your 'question' Pontiac.</p>
<p>If HSV-2 was even close to as difficult to horizontally transmit "in the wild", like they say, as HIV-1 (2...n) there would never have been an actual outbreak of genital herpes in the US that affected almost everyone.</p>
<p>And though I have not checked, I believe the CDC estimates of prevalnce in the US population for 25 years are not constant.</p>numbers commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550635b1d88332006-08-12T21:51:33Z2008-02-22T08:51:02ZnumbersHi Pontiac. I would assume, if the odds ratios you reported earlier are generally considered accurate, and have been replicated...<p>Hi Pontiac. I would assume, if the odds ratios you reported earlier are generally considered accurate, and have been replicated in other studies, then it would be safe to assume that if the couples in Padian were tested for HSV-2, the odds of transmission would have been exactly the same as found in previous studies. </p>Pontiac commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550776fd788342006-08-12T21:25:43Z2008-02-22T08:50:35ZPontiacIf the couples in the Padian study had been discordant for HSV-2, what % probability would there have been that...<p>If the couples in the Padian study had been discordant for HSV-2, what % probability would there have been that she'd've seen no transmission of HSV-2?</p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55077713088342006-08-12T21:16:10Z2008-02-22T08:51:31ZGeorgePontiac, Indeed, you have educated us all on the difference between a study that can report real data and one...<p>Pontiac,</p>
<p><br />
Indeed, you have educated us all on the difference between a study that can report real data and one that draws its quantitative conclusions from meta-statistical withcraft. </p>
<p>It does of course absolutely nothing to call into question anything at all Dr. Culsahw or others have written, none of which is based on the made up out of tattered cloth estimates Padian et al. produce.</p>
<p>You might also take note of perhaps the most critical point of this study in regard to the matter udner discussion here. Namely, a real infection was documented sufficient number of times to make rather precise estimates of the contact rates, and when combined with the number of infections in the population this indeed makes for a relatively easily transmissible agent. Compare this to the 10 years of 0 that the multicenters found. </p>Pontiac commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550776b6888342006-08-12T20:59:15Z2008-02-22T08:49:02ZPontiachttp://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/350/1/11?ijkey=6a9c974d5db65ce3acc8cd7cfe722350c18f0bca The frequency of genital HSV-2 acquisition increased with the reported frequency of sexual activity and was 0.35 per 1000...<p>http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/350/1/11?ijkey=6a9c974d5db65ce3acc8cd7cfe722350c18f0bca</p>
<p>The frequency of genital HSV-2 acquisition increased with the reported frequency of sexual activity and was 0.35 per 1000 sexual contacts among the susceptible partners of valacyclovir recipients, as compared with 0.68 per 1000 sexual contacts among the susceptible partners of placebo recipients. The respective rates of acquisition among susceptible women were 0.60 and 1.27 per 1000 sexual contacts and, among susceptible men, 0.23 and 0.35 per 1000 sexual contacts. </p>
<p>Despite counseling, 37 percent of the couples reported at each monthly visit that they never used condoms for vaginal or anal intercourse at all during the study, 20 percent reported that they used condoms more than 90 percent of the time, and 43 percent reported that they used them between 1 and 90 percent of the time.<br />
</p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550776c2c88342006-08-12T20:40:03Z2008-02-22T08:49:16ZGeorgeI am not Dr. Culshaw, and did not have a chance to read your educational posting re HSV-2. Perhaps you...<p>I am not Dr. Culshaw, and did not have a chance to read your educational posting re HSV-2. Perhaps you would care to reposition it. If you do, I trust you will provide in context quotations and full citations for any literature you cite. You have no authority as an anonymous automobile to expect any one to take you at your word. </p>Pontiac commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e5507771ff88342006-08-12T20:03:33Z2008-02-22T08:51:51ZPontiacHope Rebecca had a chance to learn something about HSV-2 transmission before Hank deleted the post<p>Hope Rebecca had a chance to learn something about HSV-2 transmission before Hank deleted the post</p>Michael commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55063552d88332006-08-12T19:06:05Z2008-02-22T08:48:41ZMichaelHey all. I was just looking at the "Words of Rebecca Culshaw" thread at Tara's Aeitiology blogsite, and it seems...<p>Hey all. I was just looking at the "Words of Rebecca Culshaw" thread at Tara's Aeitiology blogsite, and it seems that Tara is trying to spank the rethinkers with the "New and Improved" politcal statements of Nancy Padian posted on Moores Aidstruth.</p>
<p>Ole honest Abe Lincoln is over there stating the obvious, but wow, seems like you shook them all up Hank with your Padian Report.</p>
<p>http://scienceblogs.com/aetiology/2006/08/interview_with_hiv_rethinker_r.php#comment-191872</p>LS commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e5506355e888332006-08-12T18:51:56Z2008-02-22T08:48:49ZLShttp://liamscheff.comGood and fair responses, all around. I will consider putting up a post that highlights, once again, the frailties of...<p>Good and fair responses, all around. </p>
<p>I will consider putting up a post that highlights, once again, the frailties of this testing modality.</p>
<p>In the meantime, I accept HB's future caveat: "if we accept that the tests mean anything... which they don't."</p>
<p>I think that has to be placed firmly into every discussion, for the primary reason that it is true.</p>
<p>For the roundness of argument, I'll accept the lovely Rebecca's notes on greet them where are --- but with that subscript in place: "there is no such thing as an HIV test."</p>
<p>Whatever else is being fought, whatever brand of microbiological existentialism is being bandied, the reality is that the tests function as the scarlet letter that puts the rest of the hypnosis over on folks who have never been given a fair read of the contentious material surrounding the paradigm...</p>
<p>So, do it for me, and email me when it comes up in debate. I'll show up.</p>
<p>Bests,</p>
<p>Liam</p>Rebecca Culshaw commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55063568c88332006-08-12T18:27:19Z2008-02-22T08:48:58ZRebecca CulshawYes, there is no such thing as an hiv-specific test. Furthermore, as Giraldo and Kremer have pointed out, we're all...<p>Yes, there is no such thing as an hiv-specific test. Furthermore, as Giraldo and Kremer have pointed out, we're all "hiv+" to a greater or lesser degree (show me any other antibody test that requires anywhere NEAR a 400-fold dilution (ELISA) or even 50-fold (WB)).</p>
<p>However... as George pointed out (different strokes for different folks), not everyone will be responsive to this argument without further information. This is where the discussion of the implications of Padian and other studies is useful.</p>
<p>And I do really think that it is important that we remember that in terms of the odds-ratio calculated, Padian is NOT an outlier. (I can provide references if anyone wants them.) The Uganda study Stephen Davis cites, as well as other studies conducted in Africa and elsewhere, only cement the inescapable conclusion: "hiv+" is extremely inefficiently transmitted sexually, if at all, REGARDLESS OF WHERE IN THE WORLD ONE LIVES. </p>
<p>This is really important, because most people believe the figure given by the establishment, which is that 70-80% of 38 million people worldwide are "infected with hiv" via "heterosexual transmission". Pointing out that transmission rates in Africa are EXACTLY the same as in the developed world completely kills everything they've been saying for years. The establishment has put themselves in an impossible position with this claim, for their own data exposes this claim as ludicrous.</p>
<p>Once people realise that they've been told a pack of racist (and homophobic) lies, they'll be much more receptive to hearing about the flaws in the tests, etc., which as LS points out, is absolutely imperative for people to know because it "puts the final nails in the coffin" of the entire stinking hypothesis.</p>
<p>I still think *some* people need to be shown how THEIR paradigm falls apart under proper interpretation of THEIR data, first, though, before they'll even listen to the rest of it. Just my two cents.</p>HankBarnes commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55077689588342006-08-12T16:56:22Z2008-02-22T08:48:33ZHankBarnesChris, Welcome! We love unabashed cynics;) LS, Great points. Tend to agree with most of them. Maybe I should start...<p>Chris,</p>
<p>Welcome! We love unabashed cynics;) </p>
<p>LS,</p>
<p>Great points. Tend to agree with most of them. Maybe I should start all Padian discussions with <i> assuming HIV "positive" means anything </i>...Padian found "no seroconversions."</p>
<p>Gene,</p>
<p>Aren't you fatigued yet from that 500 comment thread at Tara's?:)</p>
<p>E-mail me at Hankbarnes@hotmail.com -- I wanna chat with you.</p>
<p>Barnes</p>Gene Semon commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e5506355a688332006-08-12T15:58:35Z2008-02-22T08:48:46ZGene SemonI've just come across this sparkling thread and my first response is to thank Hank for starting it and second...<p>I've just come across this sparkling thread and my first response is to thank Hank for starting it and second Rebecca's post.</p>
<p>Given Peter Duesberg's definiton of isolation of HIVs (and it is important here to take note of the plural) and the extensive Perth Group exposition of the specificity problem in using "seroconversions" as surrogates for HIV transmission-incidence, there is no real evidence one way or the other (based on proviral detection) for sexual, MTCT, saliva (once claimed by Gallo et al!) or any other type of horizontal transmissions. A lot of educated and not-so educated guessing. At best, we have evidence of ancient germ-line "infections" and subsequent "re-infections" via the study of HERVs, which is another confounder when trying to detect HIVs. </p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550776a3e88342006-08-12T15:42:05Z2008-02-22T08:48:50ZGeorgeLS I agree with everything you wrote, and wrote very well too even I say so myself. The problem, as...<p>LS</p>
<p>I agree with everything you wrote, and wrote very well too even I say so myself. </p>
<p>The problem, as you well know, and has been so well illustrated in this thread, is that the expression "different strokes for different folks" is all too pervasively true -- maybe it's OMG genetic -- and the crucial points you raise appear to be too subtle for some (including myself at times) to keep in focus for more than a moment or three.</p>
<p>Let me reiterate therefore what I take to be a reasonable summation of your position.</p>
<p>There is no such thing as HIV/AIDS science. There is only HIV/AIDS politics. The political realities are genocidal, racist, and neo-colonialist in their ramifications and possibly at their cores.<br />
</p>Dan commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e5506355ba88332006-08-12T15:12:35Z2008-02-22T08:48:47ZDanI agree with the eugenics factor. Actually, it reminds me of those nature shows. The ones where there will be...<p>I agree with the eugenics factor.</p>
<p>Actually, it reminds me of those nature shows. The ones where there will be a large herd of zebras grazing and a cheetah will start chasing one. Almost immediately, the ones that aren't being chased will calmly go back to eating grass, realizing it's NOT THEM who are being chased and eaten.</p>
<p>None of the caucasian heterosexual people I know sees themselves "at risk". Talking with them, I find out the thing they're concerned about sex-wise, is unwanted pregnancy. "AIDS" is for "others" (gays, blacks, hispanics, people in other countries, but not THEM).</p>
<p>"AIDS" stays in "risk groups" because that's mainly how it's "diagnosed". </p>LS commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e5506355da88332006-08-12T10:24:03Z2008-02-22T08:48:49ZLShttp://liamscheff.comOy and Gevalt! Yes, we witness a brand of denialism rarely seen outside of the palaces of egyptian princesses. Sorry,...<p>Oy and Gevalt!</p>
<p>Yes, we witness a brand of denialism rarely seen outside of the palaces of egyptian princesses. </p>
<p>Sorry, that's de-nile-ism.</p>
<p>But to break up the party, I'd like to play hall monitor and point to what I think is becoming a problem in the world of the rethinkers.</p>
<p>Padian's data certainly indicate that if there were a test that recorded the presence or passing of a particular particle, call it what you will, than that particle would be harder to acquire than a lifetime membership to the Playboy Mansion would be for, oh, let's say...Anita Bryant (in her heyday).</p>
<p>But, ladies and germs - it doesn't.</p>
<p>It doesn't indicate that anything had passed, or was present because, as we all know and record, over and over again ----></p>
<p>There is no such thing as a test for HIV. (That's a period following the sentence, and it should be read aloud).</p>
<p>Padian is a confounding study for the mainstream, and so it serves to be devicive in wrenching the carrion-eaters from their tree branches for a few moments... but I think that it misses the point, or reinforces an unreality... namely that there's any particular thing being tested for in any of the millions who are now subjected to this bizarre eugenics lottery.</p>
<p>In short (although I think that time has passed), I declare that we need to be unified in our logic and in our position. We understand that there is no such thing as an HIV test.</p>
<p>The materia medica is graffitied with the frustrated markings of those who have asked 'why are these tests such garbage!?' without realizing the profound import of the question...</p>
<p>The test instructions and inserts tell the story, over and over again - they are neither virologic, nor specific for any particular reaction, nor standardized - and they're not even necessary, according to the manufacturers. They are used to shoehorn on the diagnosis - AIDS - but AIDS is diagnosed clinically, or according to CDC/WHO voodoo (black, gay, poor, african - get in line! The rest of you can go home).</p>
<p>The tests are reverse validated by the clinicians assesment that the test should be meaningful. A low-reactive response will be re-tested in triplicate, where the clinician decides that 'this one is really black... I mean.. at risk! So that negative, well, must be a false-negative.'</p>
<p>We know this, because we've all read it, written about it, or seen it in action.</p>
<p>I would really like it if there were some uniformity in presentation among the rethinkers. In the end, re-iterating Padian is good for a laugh - but it misses the bigger question:</p>
<p>What is this thing we're doing to everybody in the world who is black, poor, drug-abusing, or gay enough to qualify for this reverse-engineered AIDS then HIV positive labeling system? </p>
<p>Because it looks a lot like a kind of colonialism, a kind of eugenics, a kind of population control - a kind of culling, to me.</p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>Chris commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55077704088342006-08-12T04:01:58Z2008-02-22T08:50:49ZChrisHank, This is the first time I am posting to your site. I have followed it with great interest. I...<p>Hank,</p>
<p>This is the first time I am posting to your site. I have followed it with great interest. I have made a few comments on NAR before. I was just reading the current issue of U.S. News and World Report and stumbled upon an article so vapid that I thought it would provoke your interest...perhaps also a tad bit o' scorn. On page 66 is a little piece titled, "The Sound and Fury of HIV." Now, I will state up front that I work for an HIV/AIDS resource center, and further loudly proclaim to be a complete and unabashed cynic. I question HIV loudly. It certainly drives the people at the testing clinic next door nutts. And, pharma reps are warry to enter our doors. Anyway...the little piece is written by Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the NIH. This tripe is little more than an ode' to Bob. It contains such nuggets as "Robert Gallo had just nailed down the virus that causes AIDS." and "Robert Gallo proved that HIV was the malignant seed at the heart of AIDS." And, one of my favorite...she completely makes light of the Gallo/Montaigner affair..."Gallo had always aknowledged the Pasteur virus as the same or similar to his own..." I could go on, there are some other gems in there but I'll let you read and opine. The reason I find this interesting is that it is so obviously fluff. Why? Why the need for a pro-Bob piece in US News? One that is specifically aknowledging more of the politics, yet equally vacant in terms of actual substance. It might be something you could comment on. Love the site and keep up the good work.</p>
<p>Chris<br />
"I firmly believe that if the whole 'materia medica' could be sunk to the bottom of the sea, it would be all the better for mankind and all the worse for the fishes." Oliver Wendell Holmes</p>Trent commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550635afa88332006-08-11T17:50:05Z2008-02-22T08:50:55ZTrenthttp://profile.typekey.com/TrentLG/It really is remarkable to me that Padian did not find one research subject who contracted HIV thru sex with...<p>It really is remarkable to me that Padian did not find one research subject who contracted HIV thru sex with HIV+ individuals.</p>
<p>Can you imagine how she'd been spinning it if 80% got infected? or 50%? or even 20%?</p>
<p>Padian could be an outlier, but are there other epidemiological studies that show higher rates of transmission?</p>
<p>- Trent</p>George commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550635d1088332006-08-11T17:30:14Z2008-02-22T08:52:21ZGeorgeI think it is necessary to make it clear that the three posts immediately above from myself, Dr. Culshaw and...<p>I think it is necessary to make it clear that the three posts immediately above from myself, Dr. Culshaw and Dan are all in reference to now deleted comments by Mark Biernbaum, that contained among other things the points to which we make reference and the quotation that Dr. Culshaw responds to when she writes: "I fail to see how the Padian post at AIDSTruth.org has "showed us up"." </p>Dan commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e55077726388342006-08-11T15:44:57Z2008-02-22T08:52:06ZDanI think we all understand that those numbers (1/1000 and 1/10,000) don't mean that a person will be able to...<p>I think we all understand that those numbers (1/1000 and 1/10,000) don't mean that a person will be able to have 999 unprotected sexual contacts with "HIV-infected" individuals and not become "infected". And then, of course no. 1000 will be when "HIV" is transmitted. </p>
<p>I think a shorthand explanation of sorts has been getting used with these numbers. Maybe that's misleading.<br />
</p>Rebecca Culshaw commented on ' The Padian Waffle!'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d83451609269e200e550635af388332006-08-11T15:29:50Z2008-02-22T08:50:52ZRebecca CulshawI fail to see how the Padian post at AIDSTruth.org has "showed us up". My reading of it is that...<p>I fail to see how the Padian post at AIDSTruth.org has "showed us up". My reading of it is that it's exactly what Claus says it is - a brilliant piece of "info-ganda" (love that word) designed to effectively dismiss the issue from public discourse. But like much of what the establishment says on this and related topics, the post is full of the typical obfuscations, assumptions, and mantras ("hiv is unquestionably sexually transmitted") that must be continually repeated because otherwise, the actual evidence might lull an observer into forgetting what the mantra says.</p>
<p>However, I sense a great deal of confusion regarding what "we" are interpreting the Padian study to actually say. It is quite clear to readers of this blog that we interpret Padian (and many other studies showing similar odds ratios to 1/1000 *or even less*) to tell us that there is no way such a low infectivity can possibly be responsible for the raging hiv sex-plague that we are told is occurring. This is a clear and correct interpretation, and the point is, *Padian is not the only study showing low infectivity*!! Furthermore, the best African studies show the exact same odds ratios - effectively destroying the notion that Africa can possibly be in the midst of a deadly heterosexually propagated sex plague. Period, case closed.</p>
<p>Now, there is another way that some people interpret Padian, and that is to say that "no seroconversions => hiv cannot be sexually transmitted". This interpretation is just silly, because there is no way that we can *prove* with however many examples that hiv is just plain not sexually transmitted, any more than one could prove that it IS using a bunch of examples (post hoc, ergo propter hoc). And this interpretation is where things get sticky, because it seems pretty obvious that some people (I don't think you, Hank, btw) are using the study to attempt to support this conclusion. </p>
<p>So, we need to be pretty clear about exactly what it is we are trying to say. There are enough people out there who won't be able to read through the subtleties and will - either wilfully or not - misinterpret what we say to make us look "unscientific".</p>