My Photo

Bulletin Board

December 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

Cartoons

  • The NIH Keeps Up With The Times: 1, 2, 3. David Baltimore Has A Flashback: ***. The NY Times Keeps Up With Times: ***. The Faith of Anthony Fauci: ***. Anthony Fauci Explains How HIV Causes AIDS: ***. Robert Gallo on The Force of Ejaculation: ***, on HIV Theory: ***, Lectures in Marseilles: ***. David Ho Does The Math: ***. John Mellors Sets the Record Straight: ***. Bono, el Magnifico, Holds (Another) Press Conference: ***. Anthony Fauci Explains Journalism in the Age of AIDS: ***. Anthony Fauci and David Ho Disprove an Old Adage: ***. Anthony Fauci Explains ICL and AIDS: *** The CDC Can't Keep Up With The Times:*** The Method of the "Small Inquisitor" Moore:*** The Co-Discovery of a Nobel-Worthy Enzymatic Activity:*** The Revenge of the "Very" Minor Moriarty:*** Julie Gerberding and Anthony Fauci Learn Arithmetic:*** Osama Obama Has a Message for Africa:***

Bad Manners and Good Gossip

« Harvey Bialy Presents: The Revenge of "The (Very) Minor Moriarty" Moore | Main | Harry Smith at Naropa (1990): A Swinamish Spirit Dance (Puget Sound, circa 1940) »

April 23, 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ken Witwer [et alia]

Duly Noted

An associate has just sent me a review by Darin Brown of one of the points in my recent scribblings on HIV/AIDS denial. Since the Brown piece has apparently been placed on the Internet, I feel compelled to suggest one correction: John Moore and Bob Gallo had nothing to do with my decision to write the review of "Science Sold Out," nor are they responsible for any errors that may be found in it. The writing was mine. If you wish to take issue with my writing, please do. But please don't say that Bob Gallo or anyone else was behind this.

To give you a timeline: I happened on Culshaw's book in the health section of my local bookstore in January and soon discovered that Culshaw had a modest presence on the Internet. People were taking her suggestions as medical advice, and that bothered me since she is not a clinician and she does not even seem to know the basics of virology. So I casually wrote several pages about the falsehoods in her book. I wanted to publish this somehow, but I'm a nobody with no contacts, and I didn't just want to put it on a random blog.

I then decided to contact John Moore. I am a mere graduate student and I did not know him and had never met him, although I had heard of him and his research. I wrote Moore mainly because denialists view him as Enemy #1. I later spoke with him once on the phone in early March. Without revealing many details of our conversation, I will say that he does not consider any of you to be particularly important and was at first hesitant to "take on" Culshaw since those few HIV scientists who have heard of her consider her (with ample justification) a lightweight. But he agreed to take a look at what I was writing.

A mathematician at Los Alamos, Ruy Ribeiro, and I co-wrote a review of Culshaw's JPandS review, and that went up in late March. Because of my time constraints and other things, the book review was not finished until later. Early this month, I sent my final version to John Moore and several others people listed in my acknowledgments. John also sent the piece to Bob Gallo as a courtesy, and Bob was kind enough to point out several (three, I think) topics that in his view could stand some expansion. He did not rewrite anything or ask me to rewrite anything, although I did follow his suggestions. This resulted in a new paragraph or two. John Moore had numerous editorial comments, but he, too, did not substantially rewrite or extensively change anything. This is my writing and I ask you to respect that.

And, really, what is this all about?

"Finally, YBYL's editor wanted me to add this: "Bob, quit picking on girls and point out the errors in my book"."

I think that Culshaw could use some more education. I don't know how she got her degree with such an obvious lack of knowledge about her own supposed field of expertise. And I don't understand why anyone would write a book on something they know little or nothing about. I pointed out what I would call Culshaw's professional incompetence again and again in my review. But I have not disrespected Culshaw as a person in anything I wrote. And I have certainly not stooped to sexist comments.

I would hope that Culshaw's "friends" could adopt the same standards and look at her as the person she is, not a "girl" pawn in some BIaly/Duesberg gentlemens' game.

-Ken Witwer

----

XYZ: I think it is obvious that Ken Witwer is either Harvey Bialy or Subversive Grad. Student, and should be duly "outed", not "noted".

----

Dr. Knobless Oblige: This reminds me, "small time" of course, of Dr. Maryland (never mind where) excusing himself from the Imanishi-Kari fiasco by saying, "Really guys, it was only my name on the paper, I didn't actually read it. Jimminy Crickets, I'm The Pope, why should I read what I sign?"

----

Elizabeth Ely: Very interesting . . .

Witwer protests his political correctness in the face of Bialy's usual and admitted non-PC style. I assure you, W., the women over here at YBYL are doing quite well. In fact, we and our arguments get taken extremely seriously. Which is more than appears on the other side, with its "lightweight" comment about Rebecca Culshaw. DOCTOR Rebecca Culshaw to you, kiddo. No mere grad student, she has a Ph.D. Yes, Witwer, you DID act as though you were picking on a "girl," a "lightweight," someone without consequence.

Not that it should matter anyway --and this is the only reason I bring it up. See how Witwer talks back about who wrote his article, who reviewed it, who has authority -- but NEVER the arguments themselves. This is the acceptable career path over there, the same old status puffery. All they have to fall back on are fame and titles, and zero arguments.

The basic argument, in case you missed it, is that "AIDS" is a shifting definition. You cannot measure something that keeps getting redefined.

Therefore, "AIDS" is 100% fantasy. Not the fact that people are dying, not the fact that tests show this or that -- but just the name "AIDS." Define AIDS adequately, and we'll have something to talk about besides who has the gold-plated Ph.D.

For clarification, W., read Culshaw's excellent article, "Why I Quit HIV." In it, she explains that she quit trying to "model" something that didn't actually appear in nature. It was all theoretical. As for her lack of "basic virology," I believe Koch's Postulates just about cover that.

If you need further evidence for the 100% fantasy that this has become, try getting the real overall numbers from the CDC. Last time I checked (and it was a long time ago, I'll admit), they had discontinued the full numbers in favor of breakdowns by race, sexual preference, and whatnot. Because they don't want to give us the real numbers. Interesting that they substituted the race and sex fantasies of AIDS for those.

And I gotta love that "Enemy #1" comment about Moore. Makes us sound like paranoid Nixons. We have opponents, not enemies. We debate anyone with a real argument. I will allow, however, "Clown #1," as Moore's behavior and comments certainly qualify him for the title.

Lastly, would some non-emeriti professors please step forward in defense of common sense? Try talking about this BEFORE you retire, and maybe it will make a difference in the lives of the people who, contrary to what Witwer and others seem to believe, we actually care quite deeply about.

HB: Although the sentiment in Ms. Ely's final "graph" is totally correct, the attribution of the quality under consideration to prof. emeritus Fendel is not. Prof. Fendel is only very recently emeritus, and was a full-time working prof. in Jan. 2005, when he endorsed the presentation of this material at Dean's World as being impeccable, before it was "posted".
----

Harvey Bialy: Why is a follower of socialism, for example, called a socialist, and a person, like me, who worships sex as much as logic, called a "sexist" like it was something bad? Pound/Olson .. going back to Mencius..."If the root be in confusion, nothing will be well governed"

----

Ken Witwer: Dr. Bialy, Thank you for the link, but I don't have the time to read your blog. I take it that you have posted my email without asking my permission.

This was private correspondence, meant to inform a total of three people. I did not address it to you as editor of your blog.

I would appreciate it if you would remove anything I have written from your blog.

Thank you, Ken Witwer

----

HB: I bet you would Ken. The thanks *all* belong to you, however.

---

XYZ: Ken, I sympathize with you. It is impossible to get that insensitive so-called, homophiliac, Bialy to behave like a normal person, as I know from painful personal experience that I would be happy to share with you if the email address on the comment is a real one. In the meantime, I would suggest that you do what I did, and collect all his email to you and send it to the FBI's internet harassment division.

----

Fred Watts (fwatts@gmail.com): So, the young Witwer (guided by the unseen hands of his brilliant mentors), is grasping for Canadian data to prop up the bancrupt, virus-AIDS hypothesis in the US?

Has Witwer forgotten, or did he ever know, that in 2005, Canada , a country of 33 million, had a grand total of 318 AIDS cases?

----

Peter Duesberg: In addition to no longer reporting yearly totals, for more than 10 years now, the CDC has stopped reporting the most proximal cause of death of "AIDS" patients. In the ""freest and most democratic", and most "information rich" country in the the world, I find this policy odd.

Richard Strohman

Twenty years ago, Charlie Thomas said that the only way the HIV/AIDS machine would be stopped, and the only way to eradicate AIDS, was to turn off ALL the money spigots.

It is not too late. "AIDS" would quickly dissolve into its geographically, and demographically distinct disease manifestations; the real crooks would retire with their ill-gotten gains; the mediocre to incompetent will, as Dizzy Gillespie put it, "like old Cadillacs, 'jus be faded away by the repo company", and the bright, basically honest guys and gals, who are trying their best in the present fascist atmosphere, can have a chance to do what they really want, namely help to alleviate suffering instead of being, unwilling but not unwitting, accomplices to its worldwide infliction.

George L. Gabor Miklos

Mr. Witwer writes: "An associate has just sent me a review by Darin Brown of one of the points in my recent scribblings on HIV/AIDS denial."

I don't wish to call additional attention to the obvious, but instead to take this opportunity to repeat a joke that was older than the hills when I first heard it in my youth.

After a certain , unexpectedly interrupted theatrical performance, the following question was asked of one of the principals:

"Apart from that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the show?"

Poz_Brotherhood

I have recently been rebutted/rebuked/denied any chance for debate and any chance to have any questions about the flaws in HIV Science addressed by my doctors and social workers at one of the largest HIV Clinics in the country. (and Glaxo's biggest bedfellow right next door in the same neighborhood as Glaxo)

Their response: "There is nothing to debate about HIV Science"

My response and their agreement: "Ok, track and measure my choice not to take ARV's for the next ten years, just as my refusal to take ARV'S for the last ten years has produced not one 'opportunistic infection'

Ironically, yet not surprising, I have never to this day had an "HIV test". I was diagnosed merely because I was a gay man with low t-cells

I have lived with 50-150 t-cells for the last ten years. My so-called Viral Load count has gone up and down for the last ten years. (as high as 750,000) Still not dead. Still not sick. Sorry, docs, I'm blowing your cover.

Stay tuned as I'm conducting my own "Padian Study", as if ten years as mentioned above is not enough, now it's going to be official.

Maybe I'll live, maybe I'll die. It's not like any of us are getting out of here alive anyway.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Comments

  • Comments are regarded as letters to the editor. They are subject to the same policies as the NY Times and Nature, and are not published until after editorial review.
Blog powered by Typepad

Contact