Recent Comments

Categories

Meta

Tags

8-hydroxy efavirenz addiction ADR adverse drug reactions AIDS anal sex ARV Atripla Baylor benzodiazepine Bristol-Myers Squibb Celia Farber Christine Maggiore circuit party cocaine Cornell University corruption Daniel Kuritzkes MD Dissidents for Dummies efavirenz fraud gallo HAART HIV HIV Innocence Project House of Numbers immune Jeffrey “JT” DeShong John P. Moore John P. Moore, Phd marxism montagnier NIH Nobel orwell P450 enzymes pacifism pharmaceutical Robert Gallo Saul Alinsky Sustiva totalitarianism war withdrawal WWII

Spam Blocked

Recent Posts

 

June 2017
S M T W T F S
« Oct    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Links:

Site search

Recent Trackbacks

Recent Comments

  • fritzkohle: Dear Clark, somewhere I read that Simian AIDS was found in binge-drinking monkeys infected with SIV....
  • FloridaCalifornian: Just came across your blog courtesy of ResedaWeb.blog…We recently moved from S Florida to a...
  • California Conservative: People will always scoff. But they also fail to articulate fact-based rebuttals.
  • California Conservative: Stong language. Strong opinions. Would expect nothing less from Clark Baker.
  • Da Goddess: Simply and perfectly illustrated.

Site search

Categories

June 2017
S M T W T F S
« Oct    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Tags

Blogroll

HIV/AIDS: Is the Media Catching On?

When I reported the Nobel Committee’s snubbing of Robert Gallo’s contribution to AIDS this month, I didn’t expect the story to go further than a few conservative blogs. But after reporting what appears to be the greatest scientific fraud in history, more mainstream media sources are finally picking up the story – or at least tepidly reporting on a few of the story’s actors.

BarnesWorld now reports that NPR, the Baltimore Sun, Herald Sun, Scientific American, The Times UK , Newsweek , Forbes, Washington Post, and Time have all raised the same question: Why did only one of two alleged co-discoverers of HIV/AIDS receive one-quarter of one 2008 Nobel Prize for Medicine? If their discovery legitimately merited Nobel recognition, why didn’t they receive the entire prize, and why didn’t the two co-discoverers share it?

The Nobel Committee’s action only raises more questions about the legitimacy of HIV/AIDS funding, an endless windfall that is fast approaching a $1,000,000,000,000 (one trillion) taxpayer-funded industry that is entirely based upon Dr. Gallo’s unproven assumption that HIV attacks cells and causes AIDS. Even after the National Academy of Sciences published one leading scientist’s questions, the best Gallo’s pharmaceutically-funded defenders could do was blog their rebuttal.

Taxpayers can only hope that the media’s awakening will lead to more questions about the legitimacy of HIV/AIDS science.

Write a comment

You need to login to post comments!