I have previously discussed Figure 3 of Rodriguez et al. (JAMA, Sept. 27, 2006), which shows an extremely poor, bordering on zero, correlation between CD4 cell numbers and HIV viral load. Today, I take a closer look at Figure 2 of the same article, which is reproduced below.
There are 5 bar graphs showing median CD4 cell loss per year for each of 5 HIV viral load subgroups.
Each chart shows a Gaussian distribution of the data. I have drawn a pencil line through the midpoints of the parts of the figure to
make it obvious that the locations of the center bar for each of the five Gaussian distribution charts fall on a very straight line that screams: HIV is not the cause AIDS.
The caption below the figure reads: “…to emphasize the slight increase in CD4 cell decline with increasing plasma HIV RNA levels”.
The caption is misleading. There is no slight increase in CD4 decline. There is only a very negligible or no increase with increasing HIV load.
If one wanted to present results showing that increasing HIV viral load numbers do not lead to the loss of CD4 cells (sometimes called AIDS), I cannot think of a better visual demonstration.
W. Keith Henry MD in a JAMA editorial on p.1523 of the same issue writes: “These findings provide support to those who favor non-virological mechanisms as predominant causes of CD4 cell loss”
He also writes: “The seemingly useful practice of combining CD4 cell count and plasma HIV RNA levels to assess individual prognosis or response to HAART needs to be re-examined”...[and]... “Sustainability of the current paradigm (anti-retroviral combo drugs) is at best questionable.”
After 20+ years of HIV/AIDS research, JAMA finally agrees with Peter Duesberg.
Authors, Rodriguez and Lederman were driven by the dissident enthusiasm for their paper to make an unprecedented and childish defense of their work on various unread church weblogs, that actually contain some satire almost as good as what is found here, although the satire is of course entirely unconscious. It went, in part, like this:
”There is absolutely no doubt that HIV is the cause of AIDS; far from challenging the veracity of this statement, our work further confirms it. This is easily appreciated from our initial analysis of the data, which shows that on average, individuals with higher viral loads tend to lose CD4 cells more rapidly that those with lower viral loads.”
Only if saying so makes it so docs. You can spin all you want, but the WMDS weren't in Iraq, and no amount of bluster will make them magically appear.
Jeffrey Dach M.D. is board certified in interventional radiology and a member of the Board of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine. He retired from radiology two years ago, and is currently in private practice focusing on bio-identical hormone treatment. He is also a painter who frequently exhibits.
Ni Hao! Kannichi Wa!
Don’t be too hard on “The Bad Boys of Cleveland.” The first step in a general rebellion is for individuals to experience the joy of rebellion, "bad” in the eyes of the established order, and an emergent victim of sorts, no matter how trivial the momentary target of rebellion. Once the spark of rebellion is lit, it can grow into a raging fire, unless snuffed or bought out early on by wealth and power.
Overlook The Boys necessary hypocritical shout about how beautiful are the Emperor’s clothes (HIV = AIDS), necessary before the King’s capos, henchmen and hangmen that pervade control mechanisms of dissemination of results and support throughout the “peer review” system move into action.
The Boys may be learning something general that can be applied elsewhere despite the fact their specific immunoresponse model (HIV) may have nothing to do with cause of AIDS.
If only Professor Moore could sit back and enjoy working out the details of protein-protein interactions and how to block them for the sheer joy of knowing instead of such preoccupation with the fear that the interaction system may be from a cell culture curiosity having nothing to do with cause of disease. Like the rest of us dedicated curiosity-oriented working stiffs are doing with the myriad of products of inheritable genomes.
MOTYR
Posted by: Mouth of the Yellow River | November 08, 2006 at 12:38 PM
MOTYR,
You are either a very, very funny fellow, an optimist of the sort that thinks the election results will make a single thing objectively better, or possessed of eastern inscrutability that makes the insidious Dr. Fu transparent.
John Moore could not calculate a dipole moment, or solve a simple transform or calculate a Kd or anything else that those like you (and me once)who are enamored of chemo-topological puzzles do for the shear joy of the doing.
He can barely cross the street safely.
Posted by: George | November 08, 2006 at 06:38 PM
The New Scientist is publishing a story on similar research results. Here's a revealing quote:
"Brian Williams of the WHO and his colleagues studied HIV-positive and HIV-negative populations...
"They found that between 3 and 5 per cent of HIV-negative people had CD4 counts below 350."
As I tell people in my world the most common reaction I hear is, "That's crazy."
What is NOT crazy about 25 years of HIV/AIDS? It's time to put it down! NotAIDS!
Posted by: Hollywood | November 11, 2006 at 09:35 AM
Latest on Fox News (in the unlikely event you missed it)
American Journal of Medical Care (or something like that):
Life expectancy of Americans with Aids: 24 yrs!! Medical expenses: $25,000 per annum.
Hey Claus! Don't you get CNN in BKK, or do you prefer the Irish Foxes? "Whenever", thanks for the nod, and here is the ref. [Otis]
Posted by: Claus Jensen | November 11, 2006 at 09:42 AM