portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

gender & sexuality


"The legendary Cosmopolitan editor was vilified in 1993 when she published a piece called "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS." But she was right." NY POST

New York Post
March 19, 2004 --

THE public health experts - and their amen corner in the media - owe Helen Gurley Brown an apology.

The legendary Cosmopolitan editor was vilified in 1993 when she published a piece called "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS." But she was right.

Eleven years later, Details is asking: "Whatever Happened to AIDS and Straight Men?" The article states, "A disease-free man who has unprotected sex with a drug-free woman stands a one in 5 million chance of contracting HIV."
The story by Kevin Gray also cites a joke that made the rounds of the New York City Department of Health as statistics came in showing that the predicted spread of AIDS to heterosexuals wasn't happening:
"What do you call a man who got HIV from his girlfriend? . . . A liar."
"I feel somewhat vindicated," Brown told PAGE SIX.

Michael Fumento, who wrote the original 1990 book titled "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS," said, "I'm not waiting for an apology. It's not going to happen."
When Basic Books published Fumento's tome, "Distributors refused to handle it," he says. "Stores refused to carry it. And at many stores that did have it, clerks left it in the basement."
Celia Farber, who wrote an AIDS column in Spin magazine, was routinely attacked because she refused to rehash the propaganda put out by AmFAR and other groups.
"Everybody who was wrong got journalism awards. Everybody who was right got all but driven from the profession," Farber said.

Farber exposed the conspiracy between profit-hungry drug companies, researchers who wanted more funding, homosexuals who didn't want the disease to be known as "the gay plague," and conservatives who wanted to turn back the sexual revolution.
"They believed in what they were doing, not what they were saying," Fumento said. "They knew it was lies. They felt the end justified the means."
At a recent editorial meeting at Seed, the new science magazine, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Laurie Garrett supposedly threatened to quit when a colleague suggested a story about Peter Duesberg, a leading retrovirologist.

Duesberg lost his funding, his laboratory, and his students when he announced in 1987 that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. "He lost everything," said one insider. Duesberg switched to cancer research, and is now touted to win a Nobel Prize.

homepage: homepage: http://www.dissidentaction.com

oh really? 28.Mar.2004 03:27

quizzy cal

Then how do you explain the raging AIDS epidemic (which of course requires a raging HIV epidemic to happen) in many parts of Africa? Are all of those women prostitutes gay? Are those men all practicing bisexuality? If one goes with numbers--say 10% of the population is gay--then parts of Africa, when viewed alone, offer highly compelling evidence that heterosexuals can and do readily contract HIV.

What I'm saying is that Paul King has access to all the data he needs to know that his little conspiracy theory is a crock of shit. Of course the drug companies want to rape the world for every penny they can get, but, ahem, "facts are stubborn things".

yeah really! 28.Mar.2004 06:13


How do you kill people "en masse" without conventional weapons?

Since people who were 100% healthy were diagnosed with "hiv",
people started to get curious how that could be. It was then
found out that "hiv" was a "bogus term" used on people who
had many things ranging from a cold or flu to people who had
pneumonia etc. etc.(compare with the "SARS" scam).

And, since most people who were "diagnosed" with "hiv" never
"developed" "AIDS" people were starting to question the whole
"hiv"-to-"AIDS" myth.

What was concluded was that "hiv"/"AIDS" was a complete hoax.

The trick was to diagnose people with "hiv" so they would
want to BUY the poisons the drug companies were selling.

People who would not have died unless they had started
to use the "Aids-drugs" then died in droves. The "drugs"
quickly started to kill off vital parts in the body
that would protect and heal it naturally.

"AIDS" was and still is a hoax.
It was created as a stealthy way of "depopulation"/killing people.

Look up the Rockefeller's links to the AIDS industry and
their interest in "population control".

so not really then 28.Mar.2004 15:23

quizzy cal

If AIDS/HIV is a hoax, then my point about the article is still valid because it wouldn't be a "gays only" disease then--it wouldn't be a disease at all.

And yeah, we already know the Rockefellers think the world population needs to be cut down by well over half.

I still don't agree with you that it's a hoax. Are hundreds of scientists in on the hoax or do they just imagine that they see a virus in a person's blood when they peek into an electron microscope? Is the hoax so elaborate that testing centers assign rural tests a much lower probability of getting AIDS? What about the testing administered at universities that one would imagine have a high degree of autonomy? If people test positive and then test again to verify with a different anonymous blood sample ID, then why does a positive usually come back positive? These are all questions that I can up with in a couple of minutes and maybe they're not the right questions, but what are the answers?

I'm not ruling you out, but I'm certainly calling you on your claims.

That is a clear case of old diseases, new name. 28.Mar.2004 17:00

Paul King

' Then how do you explain the raging AIDS epidemic (which of course requires a raging HIV epidemic to happen) in many parts of Africa? '

The story below is the first of what will be a series. The reporter, DOUGLAS MONTERO, wants to continue his investigation and is hoping that other AIDS drug victims will contact him with their stories. The print version contains more text than the web version below. It also includes a number of photographs, including one of the skull-and-crossbones AZT label. On one level, it's disappointing Liam Scheff's story was not published first as he did all the research, but it's good to know we all had an effect in getting this story out there and that even the Health Authorities are investigating the matter. kjl]


New York Post, FRONT PAGE


February 29, 2004 -- The state Health Department has launched a probe into potentially dangerous drug research conducted on HIV-infected infants and children at a Manhattan foster-care agency, The Post has learned. Some 50 foster kids were used as "guinea pigs" in 13 experiments with high doses of AIDS medications at Manhattan's Incarnation Children's Center, sources said.

Most of the ICC experiments were funded by federal grants and in some cases, pharmaceutical companies. They used city foster children, who were sent to the Catholic Archdiocese-run facility by the Administration for Children's Services.

ICC was involved in 36 different experiments, according to the National Institutes of Health Web site. One study researched "HIV Wasting Syndrome," which studied how a child's body changes when his medication is altered.

A handful of the experiments involved combining up to six AIDS drugs - so-called "cocktails" - in children as young as 3 months, and another explores the reaction of not one, but two doses of the measles vaccine in kids ages 6 to 7 months.

Other studies tested the "safety," "tolerance" and "toxicity" of AIDS drugs.

"They are torturing these kids, and it is nothing short of murder," said Michael Ellner, a minister and president of Health Education AIDS Liaison, an advocacy group for HIV parents.

Biochemist Dr. David Rasnick, a visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley and an expert in AIDS medication, was outraged because the drugs, alone or combined, have "acute toxicity which could be fatal."

He said the drugs' side effects include severe liver damage, cancerous tumors, severe anemia, muscle wasting, severe and life-threatening rashes and "buffalo hump," where fatty tissues accumulate behind the neck.

Housed in a former convent and run by the Archdiocese of New York's Catholic Charities, the foster-care agency described the experiments on its own Web site, which was abruptly shut down after The Post began making inquiries.

Archdiocese spokesman Joseph Zwilling said experiments at ICC were halted in 2002. He said he did not know why. Zwilling also said he did not know if any children had died.

An ACS spokeswoman said the agency hasn't approved any new experiments since 2000 because the "risks outweighed the benefits." She declined to explain further. That agency is also reviewing its files on the case.

Jacqueline Hoerger was a pediatric nurse at ICC from 1989 to 1993 and said the experimentation was going on even back then. "We were taught that any symptom we saw was HIV-related," said Hoerger, 43. "The vomiting, diarrhea, wasting syndrome, the neurological side effects - they were
dying. There was death."

She didn't think doctors were doing anything wrong, however, until years later, when she tried to adopt two of the foster girls. When she refused to give the kids the center's high-powered AIDS cocktails for fear it was making them sicker, ACS had social workers take the children away from

Advocates for children question the ethics of experimenting on foster kids - especially those too young to know what's happening to them.

"The most vulnerable, disadvantaged children are being exploited by powerful entities and used as guinea pigs as if they were not human beings," said Vera Sharav from the Alliance for Human Research and Protection.

The tests were conducted by doctors from Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, which was affiliated with ICC until 2002 and reaped the financial benefits of the research.

"Through these trials, children at the ICC outpatient clinic gained access to state-of-the-art treatments for HIV," said Annie Bayne, a Columbia spokeswoman.

ACS policy states it seeks parental consent before a child is enrolled in a study. If the parents cannot be found, ACS's medical and legal divisions, and its commissioner, must all approve.

The condition, however, is that the experiment "offer each participating child a significant potential benefit, a concomitant minimal risk of injury or harm," ACS spokeswoman MacLean Guthrie said.

Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta, who headed ACS at the time of the experiments, refused comment.

Officials at ICC, which was established in 1989 to house and care for HIV-infected "boarder babies" left stranded in city hospitals, refused to talk to The Post.

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc. NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc.

Copyright 2003 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.


Example of how the exaggerations work 28.Mar.2004 17:02

Paul King

Excerpted from United News of India:

CIA Report on HIV/AIDS Baseless
by Annapurna Jha
November 10, 2002

''Mr Gates interest in HIV/AIDS projects in India is not meant for charity,
as it appears. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contributing funds to
fight AIDS is to protect his billions of dollars of investments in
pharmaceutical companies interested in conducting field trials in India,''
Mr Mulloli said.

Health Minister Shatrughan Sinha has already rejected the CIA report, and
the National Intelligence Council clearly stated the CIA estimates to be
'highly exaggerated' and not based on surveillance data collected in India.

Mr Gates has reportedly funded the controversial report and also made huge
investments in companies involved in AIDS drug research.

Charging that the CIA's direct and unwarranted involvement in Indian public
health issues amounted to direct intervention in its domestic affairs and a
challenge to its soverignity, Mr Mulloli questioned the basis on which the
CIA said that 310,000 people had died in India due to AIDS in 1999 alone.

The Indian Parliament talked of a mere 114 AIDS related deaths in 1999.


Excerpted from Pioneer News Service, New Delhi:

Sinha Rejects US Report on AIDS
November 10, 2002

India has rejected an US intelligence agency report which projects that the
country will have over 25 million people suffering with AIDS by 2010 even as
an NGO charged that the report was aimed at exploiting Indian market for
AIDS drugs and vaccines.


Excerpted from the Daily Pioneer:

Mysterious Malaise
by Purushottaman Mulloli of JackIndia
November 17, 2002

The CIA says India will have 25 million infected people by 2010, the maximum
in any country. But India has recorded only 287 AIDS deaths in 1997, 217 in
1998, and 114 in 1999. In whose interest is it to push up these figures?

Old diseases, new name 28.Mar.2004 17:27

Paul King

' Then how do you explain the raging AIDS epidemic (which of course requires a raging HIV epidemic to happen) in many parts of Africa? '

SORRY. I posted the wrong response to this question. HERE IS THE REPLY: -

Every epidemic disease is now renamed 'AIDS' under the Bangui Definition.

Mortalities (non natural) in S.A. remain at the same 2.2% P.A. that they were BEFORE AIDS. Either every other disease in the region vanished overnight or 'AIDS' is simply the old diseases with a new name. You decide.


In Africa, the continent supposedly being decimated by
HIV, HIV tests are rarely ever done, so there the idea
that all patients with AIDS are infected with HIV is
based entirely on supposition.

At a WHO conference in the Central African Republic in 1985, U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) introduced the "Bangui Definition" of AIDS in Africa.

The CDC officials later explained, "The definition was reached by consensus, based mostly on the delegates' experience in treating AIDS patients. It has proven a useful tool in determining the
extent of the AIDS epidemic in Africa, especially in areas where no testing is available.

It's major components were prolonged fevers (for a month or more), weight loss of 10% or greater, and prolonged diarrhea..."(McCormick, 1996). Where AIDS is diagnosed clinically, large numbers of AIDS patients test negative for HIV. As no HIV testing is required in Africa we have no idea how many AIDS cases there are HIV positive (De ####, 1991; Gilks, 1991; Widy-Wirski, 1988).


Other conditions common in underprivileged and
impoverished communities that are known to cause false
positive results are tuberculosis, malaria, hepatitis and leprosy (Burke, 1993; Challakeree, 1993; Johnson, 1998; Kashala, 1994; MacKenzie,1992; Meyer, 1987). In fact, these are the primary health threats in Africa; several million cases of tuberculosis and malaria are reported in Africa each year - more than all the AIDS cases reported in Africa since 1982 (WHO, 1998)*.

Study proves aids is not an std 28.Mar.2004 19:49


Dear Paul,

Great collection of articles. I think this study proved for once and for all that aids is NOt an std.

The 10-year Padian study observed sexually active
couples in which one partner was HIV positive. The result: in 10 years, not
one uninfected partner contracted HIV, even though all participants admitted
to having sex without condoms. The study states, 'We followed up 175
HIV-discordant couples over time, for a total of approximately 282
couple-years of follow up. The longest duration of follow-up was 12 visits
(6 years). We observed no seroconversion [infection] after entry into the
study." In the three-year Stewart study (1985) not one male partner of
HIV-positive women contracted HIV. Prostitution is not even listed as an HIV
risk category by the CDC, because of the extremely low incidence of HIV
transmission to clients who have no other risk factors (i.e. drug abuse).

These findings bolster the hypothesis of some AIDS scientists that chronic
malnutrition and other environmental factors, and not a sexually-transmitted
virus, are the causes of weakened immunity in people diagnosed with one of
the nearly 30 AIDS-defining diseases (which vary from country to country).

hmmm 28.Mar.2004 23:05

quizzy cal

Well that is interesting so thanks for posting (even the "wrong" responses). I now understand the SA situation better.

I do need to snoop things a bit further. There are those who claim that AIDS is a man-made disease and really is deadly. There are those who claim it's not a disease at all. And there are those who claim that it's a gay-only disease.

That last, that it's gay-only, set me off. Why would it be a gay-only disease instead of not being a disease at all? Why would a disease affect predominantly homosexuals (barring some odd transmission factor like anal sex)?

"gay-only" 29.Mar.2004 05:49


The theory was that since the use of a lot of various "social drugs"
were used in the gay community in the 70's, 80's etc. there would
already be a noticable dent in most gays health and that would
make it easy to "diagnose" "hiv". And since everyone was brainwashed
into believing that once you've been told you have "hiv" you will die,
they spent "everything they had" and more to buy the mega expensive "AIDS-drugs",
which effectively started to destroy the body and finally kill them.

Good points anon 29.Mar.2004 13:51


...However, I wouldn't trust Fumento (original post). He also doesn't think that chemical plasticizers found in soft plastics (IV tubes, etc.) are hazardous. He's one of those skeptics for the purpose of being a skeptic.

AIDS Apologists VS AIDS Dissidents - The Truth About AIDS Denialists 08.Apr.2004 23:03


<title>AIDS Apologists VS AIDS Dissidents - The Truth About AIDS Denialists</title>

AIDS apologists are those who know HIV leads to AIDS (proven by science, so much scientific proof) and we are defending the scientifically known fact that viral pathogenesis and progression of 'HIV to AIDS' causes the eventual need for combination therapies to prolong life.

What are AIDS dissidents? Find out who, what, where, when and why:

What are AIDS denialists all about? See the myths exposed:

Learn about how they are murdering HIV positive people:


all above hiv/aids sites are liars! 15.Jun.2004 15:35


We have started a new group to defeat the lies on pozfriends.net! Please visit our guestbook, forum, links and chats!