HIV and AIDS Myths Debunked: Help Fight Misinformation By Spreading
the Truth!
HIV
denialists are spreading misinformation about HIV and AIDS. In
particular, they're filling the comments pages on HIV/AIDS videos on
YouTube, Google Video, and elsewhere with incorrect information that
may lead people to make bad choices that lead to contracting HIV and
possibly then dying of clinical AIDS as a result. You
can help correct the record! This page is a list of brief rebuttals to
the
claims commonly made by HIV denialists. Each one is only 500 characters
long so it will fit within the comment length restrictions on YouTube
and Google Video. When you see HIV denialist misinformation, copy and
paste the rebuttal from here to refute it!
There are two kinds of rebuttals on this page:
- Public domain rebuttals in black
text: You are free to copy, edit, reuse, and redistribute the
rebuttals in black text on this page without limitation, payment, or
citation; they are in the public domain.
- Third
party quotations in red text: If we quote a third party (within
double quotes) and cite the source and put the rebuttal in red text,
then if you copy that information elsewhere you should preserve the
exact text within the double quotes and the citation to avoid
committing inadvertent plagiarism. (Or, you can go to the original
source and create your own paraphrasing or quotation of the information
if you prefer.)
YouTube's comment system appears to sometimes block text that includes
URLs. Therefore, we sometimes provide two writeups for an answer: the
first without URLs (for YouTube) and the second including URLs (for
elsewhere).
Because of the 500 character length limit, we have been forced to
compress the citations in some cases by means such as dropping first
initials or "et al" or omitting part or all of an article's title while
retaining the page reference. Therefore, if citing an article for a
professional publication, be sure to verify the complete citation by
checking the original source.
This page is easy to find; just remember AIDSvideos.org/myths/.
Paste these rebuttals into comments on YouTube and Google Video; use
them in emails and newsgroups and blogs; post them on web pages; help
fight the misinformation by spreading the facts!
Quick Reference Index of Rebuttals
Myths Claiming HIV Is Not The Cause of AIDS
Myths Regarding the Isolation of AIDS
Myths About Antiretroviral Medications (ARVs) and AZT
Myths About the Latency Period
Myths About Condoms
Myths About Circumcision
Discredited Alternative Theories
Myths About the Scientific Method
HIV Denialists
Myths About HIV Tests
Myths About the Origin of HIV
Myths About HIV Transmission
Conspiracy Theories and Conflict of Interest
List of Rebuttals
Myths Claiming HIV Is Not The Cause of AIDS
Myth: HIV Doesn't Cause AIDS
Proof that HIV is the cause of AIDS is overwhelming. National Academy
of Sciences, CDC, Institute of Medicine, NIH, AMA, Canadian CDC,
Pasteur Institute, UNAIDS, and WHO all agree. Google "HIV and AIDS
Myths Debunked" to find a page at AIDSvideos with data and references
from research studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals
showing that HIV causes AIDS and debunking common myths. Or watch our
educational videos such as "The Top Ten Myths About HIV/AIDS."
Responsible scientists agree that HIV causes the disease AIDS. People
who are HIV negative do not develop AIDS. We have seen people go from
HIV negative to HIV positive to clinical AIDS countless times. There is
a correlation between the viral load in a person's blood and the
drop in the patient's CD4 count and increase in severity of disease
symptoms. When antiretroviral drugs are used and cut the patient's
viral load, the CD4 count can rebound and AIDS symptoms can improve.
NIAID: By 12/31/94, "CDC had
received reports of 42 health care workers in the United States with
documented, occupationally acquired HIV infection, of whom 17 have
developed AIDS in the absence of other risk factors .... These
individuals all had evidence of HIV seroconversion following a discrete
percutaneous or mucocutaneous exposure to blood, body fluids or other
clinical laboratory specimens containing HIV." [CDC, "HIV/AIDS
surveillance report, 1994 year-end edition," 1995a;6(no.2).]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
NIAID "Evidence That HIV Causes
AIDS:" "through December 1999, the CDC had received reports of 56
health care workers in the United States with documented,
occupationally acquired HIV infection, of whom 25 have developed AIDS
in the absence of other risk factors."
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
NIAID "Relationship Between HIV and AIDS": Known HIV seroconversion
followed by development of AIDS "has been repeatedly observed in
pediatric and adult blood transfusion," in mother-to-child
transmission, "and in studies of hemophilia, injection drug use, and
sexual transmission in which the time of seroconversion can be
documented using serial blood samples." [Ward 89, Ashton 94, ECS
91&92, Turner 93, Blanche 94,Goedert 89, Rezza 89, Biggar 90,
Alcabes 93, Gisecke 90, Buchbinder 94, Sabin 93]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
NIAID "Evidence That HIV Causes
AIDS:" "in a 10-year study in the Netherlands, researchers followed 11
children who had become infected with HIV as neonates by small aliquots
of plasma from a single HIV-infected donor. During the 10-year period,
eight of the children died of AIDS. Of the remaining three children,
all showed a progressive decline in cellular immunity, and two of the
three had symptoms probably related to HIV infection (van den Berg et
al. Acta Paediatr 1994;83:17)"
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
NIAID "Evidence:" "transmission of
HIV from a Florida dentist to six patients has been documented by
genetic analyses of virus isolated from both .... The dentist and three
of the patients developed AIDS and died, and at least one of the other
patients has developed AIDS. Five of the patients had no HIV risk
factors other than multiple visits to the dentist for invasive
procedures (O'Brien, Goedert. Curr Opin Immunol 1996;8:613; O'Brien,
1997; Ciesielski et al. Ann Intern Med 1994;121:886)."
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
NIAID: "Among HIV-infected
patients who receive anti-HIV therapy, those whose viral loads are
driven to low levels are much less likely to develop AIDS or die than
patients who do not respond to therapy. Such an effect would not be
seen if HIV did not have a central role in causing AIDS." [Montaner AIDS 1998;12:F23; Palumbo JAMA 1998;279:756; O'Brien NEJM 1996;334:426; Katzenstein NEJM 1996;335:1091; Marschner
J Infect Dis 1998;177:40; Hammer NEJM 1997;337:725; Cameron Lancet 1998;351:543]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
NIAID: Cases have been documented
where HIV+ mothers gave birth to twins where one was HIV-infected and
the other wasn't. "The HIV-infected children developed AIDS, while the
other children remained clinically and immunologically normal." [Park. J Clin Microbiol 1987;25:1119; Menez-Bautista. Am J Dis Child 1986;140:678; Thomas. Pediatrics 1990;86:774; Young. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1990;9:454; Barlow
and Mok. Arch Dis Child 1993;68:507; Guerrero
Vazquez. An Esp Pediatr 1993;39:445]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
NIAID: Animal models also show
that HIV causes AIDS. "Chimpanzees experimentally infected with HIV
have developed severe immunosuppression and AIDS. In severe combined
immunodeficiency (SCID) mice given a human immune system, HIV produces
similar patterns of cell killing and pathogenesis as seen in people.
HIV-2 .... also causes an AIDS-like syndrome in baboons." [O'Neil et al. J Infect Dis 2000;182:1051; Aldrovandi et al. Nature 1993;363:732; Locher et al. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998;22:523]
Myth: There is Not Yet a Scientific
Consensus That HIV Causes AIDS
All of the following have concluded that HIV causes AIDS: in the
U.S., the National Academy of Sciences, Centers for Disease
Control, Institute of Medicine, National Institute of Health, and
American Medical Association; the Canadian Centers for Disease Control;
the Pasteur Institute; UNAIDS; and the World Health Organization.
Claim: Consensus Has No Place In
Science
Consensus has a place in science: it determines when we stop proactive
research on a satisfactorily-resolved question in the absence of new
evidence so we can move on and focus on yet-unresolved questions. It's
why we don't fund research on whether the Earth is round or orbits the
Sun, for example: there's consensus.
If There's a Consensus HIV Causes
AIDS, Why Is There So Much Controversy?
There is "controversy" about many resolved scientific questions:
whether vaccines or fluoridation of water are safe and effective;
whether HIV causes AIDS; etc. No matter how strong the evidence, you
never convince everyone; there are always some loud isolated voices for
any position. That has no scientific significance however.
Myth: There's No Evidence that HIV is
Harmful
Studies of diverse groups have shown that being HIV+ multiplies your
risk of death compared to HIV- people. Examples of the increased death
rates: 16x for Ugandans [Nunn
BMJ 1997;315:767], 9.5x for Malawian children who survive the
first year [Taha
et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1999;18:689], 22.5x for Thai
female sex workers [Kilmarx
Lancet 2000; 356:770], 11x for hemophiliacs [Goedert.
Lancet 1995;346:1425], 60% vs. 2.3% for "homosexual and
bisexual men." [A. Munoz, MACS, personal communication]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
Myth: HIV is a Harmless
Passenger Virus
(Writeup without URLs for YouTube:)
HIV is not a harmless passenger virus. It causes AIDS, which can kill
you. YouTube seems to block URLs in comments, but see articles at the
aidstruth, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, AVERT,
AEGIS, and AIDSvideos web sites for citations of published research
study results in peer-reviewed scientific journals that prove this.
(Writeup with URLs:)
HIV is not a harmless passenger virus. It causes AIDS, which can kill
you. For proof, see:
http://aidstruth.org/hiv-aids-science.php
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm
http://www.avert.org/evidence.htm
http://www.aegis.com/topics/mdelaney.html
Question: Where are the
Peer-Reviewed Papers Proving HIV Causes
AIDS?
(Journal References:)
HIV causes AIDS. See: Ho et al, "Pathogenesis of infection with human
immunodeficiency virus," N Engl J Med 1987;317(5):278-86. Fauci AS,
"Multifactorial nature of human immunodeficiency virus disease:
implications for therapy." Science 1993a;262(3136):1011-8. Greene WC,
"AIDS and the immune system," Sci Am 1993;269(3):98-105. Levy,
"Pathogenesis of human immunodeficiency virus infection," Microbiol Rev
1993;57(1):183-289. Weiss RA, "How does HIV cause AIDS?" Science
1993;260(5112):1273-9.
(Writeup without URLs for YouTube:)
YouTube seems to block URLs in comments, but see articles at the
aidstruth, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, AVERT,
AEGIS, and AIDSvideos web sites for citations of published research
study results in peer-reviewed scientific journals that prove this.
(Writeup with URLs:)
Thousands have been published. To start, see the peer-reviewed
scientific journal articles referenced in these summaries:
http://aidstruth.org/hiv-aids-science.php
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm
http://www.avert.org/evidence.htm
http://www.aegis.com/topics/mdelaney.html
http://www.hpa.org.uk/infections/topics_az/hiv_and_sti/hiv/hiv_causes_aids.htm
Myth: HIV Doesn't Fulfill Koch's Postulates For
Proving an Infectious Agent Causes a Disease
NIAID "Relationship Between HIV
and AIDS": "All four [of Koch's] postulates have been fulfilled in
three laboratory workers with no other risk factors who have developed
AIDS or severe immunosuppression after accidental exposure to
concentrated HIVIIIB in the laboratory." [Blattner et al, "HIV/AIDS in
laboratory workers ...," IXth Int Conf on AIDS, (abstract no.
PO-B01-0876), June 6-11, 1993. Reitz et al AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses
1994;10(9):1143-55. Cohen Science 1994;266(5191):1647.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
"HIV as the cause
of AIDS meets all four of Koch's postulates .... one) Studies have
found HIV in almost every case where a person has been diagnosed with
AIDS .... two) HIV can be isolated from AIDS patients and grown in
laboratories. .... three) Most people with HIV experience immune system
decline, eventually leading to AIDS .... four) PCR tests show the
presence of HIV in infected people." (From aidstruth web site's article
"Errors in Celia Farber's March 2006 article in Harper's Magazine")
(Source: http://www.aidstruth.org/ErrorsInFarberArticle.pdf)
Myth: Primates Injected with HIV
Show No Symptoms of AIDS
NIAID "Relationship Between HIV
and AIDS": "[A]n HIV variant that causes AIDS in humans--HIV-2--also
causes a similar syndrome when injected into baboons." [Barnett et al,
"An AIDS-like condition induced in baboons by HIV-2," Science
1994;266:642-6.] The same is true of pigtailed macaques. [Morton et al,
Infection of Macaca nemestrina by HIV-1/HIV-2 ...," Laboratory of Tumor
Cell Biology Annual Meeting, Aug 22-28, 1993. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses
1994;10(suppl 1):S1-125.]
NIAID "Evidence That HIV Causes
AIDS: "Chimpanzees experimentally infected with HIV have
developed severe immunosuppression and AIDS." [O'Neil et al. J Infect Dis 2000;182:1051]
Myth: Gallo and/or Montagnier
Question That HIV Causes AIDS
Gallo and Montagnier don't question that HIV causes AIDS. From their
joint letter to Harper's: "The position of us both is that HIV is the
essential and sufficient agent that causes AIDS. One of us (Luc
Montagnier) has emphasized that there may be .... other factors that
can favour HIV transmission .... and also promote faster progression
toward the clinical stages of AIDS in untreated HIV infected people ...
but this does not put into question that HIV alone is the cause of
AIDS." (aidstruth)
(Source: http://aidstruth.org/harper-farber.php#a16)
Myth: HIV is an Endogenous Retrovirus
HIV is not a human endogenous retrovirus (HERV); those are contained
within the genome, deactivated, and unable to produce infectious virus
particles. (Source: Wikipedia.) HIV is not found in people who have not
been exposed to HIV from an external source. It's been proven to
replicate virally both in vitro and in vivo and to be capable of
infecting others who are exposed. It satisfies all of Koch's Postulates.
Myth: HIV is the Only
Retrovirus to Cause Disease
HIV is not the only retrovirus that causes a disease. There are four
retroviruses of humans (including HIV-1 and HIV2) that attack T-cells
alone. See Wikipedia articles on Retrovirus#Exogenous
and on HTLV.
Myth: HIV/AIDS Research
Has Produced No Vaccine Or Cure, So Scientists Must Be Wrong About HIV
Being the Cause of AIDS
Creating a cure or vaccine for HIV/AIDS is an incredibly hard problem.
HIV, herpes, and some other viruses can "hide" from the immune system
in the body in places like the brain, nerves, or inside cells. I'm not
aware of any medical cure for *any* virus like this that the body can't
eliminate on its own, so it's no surprise we lack one for HIV. Also,
some viruses are easy to create vaccines for; HIV is unfortunately a
hard one. So for now, prevention is our best hope.
Myth: HIV Viral Load Doesn't
Predict Clinical AIDS Progression
Doctors successfully use viral load all the time to gauge the
development of resistant strains to current ARVs within a patient and
to choose when it's time to change the ARV mix to knock the viral load
back down and prevent disease progression.
NIAID: "the risk of a patient
developing AIDS with six years was strongly associated with levels of
HIV RNA in the plasma." [Mellors et al. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:946] "Similar associations .... have been
observed in HIV-infected children in both developed and developing
countries." [Palumbo et al. JAMA 1998;279:756; Taha et al. AIDS 2000;14:453].
NIAID: "Clinical trials in both
HIV-infected children and adults have demonstrated a link between a
good virologic response to therapy (i.e. much less virus in the body)
and a reduced risk of developing AIDS or dying." [Montaner AIDS 1998;12:F23; Palumbo JAMA 1998;279:756; O'Brien NEJM 1996;334:426; Katzenstein NEJM 1996;335:1091; Marschner
J Infect Dis 1998;177:40; Hammer NEJM 1997;337:725; Cameron Lancet 1998;351:543]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
Myths Regarding the Isolation of AIDS
Myth: HIV Has Never Been Isolated
Myth: HIV Has Never Been
Isolated From AIDS Patients
Myth: HIV Has Never Been Isolated
From HIV+ Patients
Myth: HIV Has Never Been Isolated From Blood
NIAID "Relationship Between HIV
and AIDS:" "Improvements in co-culture techniques have allowed the
isolation of HIV in virtually all AIDS patients, as well as in almost
all seropositive individuals with both early- and late-stage disease."
[Coombs et al, "Plasma viremia in human immunodeficiency virus
infection," N Engl J Med 1989;321(24):1626-31. Schnittman et al, "The
reservoir for HIV-1 in human peripheral blood ...," Science
1989;245(4915):305-8." Also Ho et al 1989, Jackson et al 1990]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
NIAID "Relationship:" HIV has been "isolated from the brains of
children and adults with AIDS-associated encephalopathy, which
suggested a role for these viruses in the central nervous system
disorders seen in many patients with AIDS." [Levy JA et al. "Isolation
of AIDS-associated retroviruses from cerebrospinal fluid and brain ..."
Lancet 1985;2(8455):586-8. Ho DD et al. "Isolation of HTLV-III from
cerebrospinal fluid and neural tissues ..." N Engl J Med
1985;313(24):1493-7.]
"HIV can be
isolated from AIDS patients and grown in laboratories. PCR tests can
count the amount of HIV in blood. The virus is easily, and has been on
numerous occasions, photographed using electron microscopes." (From
aidstruth web site's article "Errors in Celia Farber's March 2006
article in Harper's Magazine")
(Source: http://www.aidstruth.org/ErrorsInFarberArticle.pdf)
Myth: HIV Has Never Been Isolated From
Semen
HIV has been isolated from the semen of patients with AIDS. [Zagury et
al. "HTLV-III in cells cultured from semen of two patients with AIDS."
Science 1984;226(4673):449-51. Ho et al. "HTLV-III in the semen and
blood of a healthy homosexual man." Science 1984;226(4673):451-3.]
Myth: HIV Has Never Been Isolated
From Vaginal Secretions
HIV has been isolated from vaginal secretions of women who are HIV+.
[Wofsy et al. "Isolation of AIDS-associated retrovirus from genital
secretions of women with antibodies to the virus." Lancet
1986;8,1(8480):527-9.]
Myth: Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)
Can't Be Used to Detect HIV
"HIV-1 PCR and HIV-1 culture were
compared in testing the PBMC of 59
HIV-1 antibody-positive and 20 HIV-1 antibody-negative hemophiliacs.
Both methods were found to have sensitivities and specificities of at
least 97 and 100%, respectively .... the sensitivities and
specificities .... for the
detection of HIV-1 appear to be equivalent, and both methods are
superior to testing for HIV-1 antigen in serum for the direct detection
of HIV-1." [Jackson et al. J Clin Microbiol 1990;28:16)]
Myth: HIV Has Never Been Seen or Imaged
Just go to Google, click "Images," and search for "HIV electron
micrograph" to see hundreds of online images alone. "The virus is easily, and has been on
numerous occasions, photographed
using electron microscopes." (From aidstruth web site's article
"Errors in Celia Farber's March 2006 article in Harper's Magazine")
(Source: http://www.aidstruth.org/ErrorsInFarberArticle.pdf)
Myths About Antiretroviral Medications (ARVs) and AZT
Myth: Antiretroviral Medications
(ARVs) Are Not Effective
From AIDStruth: A meta-analysis of 54 ARV clinical trials showed that
using one ARV reduced progression to AIDS or death by 30% compared to a
placebo, using two ARVs reduced progression by an additional 40% vs.
one ARV, and using three ARVS reduced progression by an additional 40%
vs. two ARVs. [Jordan
et al, "Systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence for increasing
numbers of drugs in antiretroviral combination therapy." BMJ
2002;324:757.]
Myth: AIDS is Caused By Antiretroviral
Medications (ARVs)
Antiretroviral medications (ARVs) do not cause AIDS. Clinical AIDS has
been diagnosed in countless people who were never treated with ARVs.
Examples include all who developed AIDS before ARVs were invented, all
who have developed it in places where ARVs were not yet available when
they contracted HIV (e.g. the developing world), and all who developed
AIDS before being treated with ARVs. HIV+ people treated with ARVs live
longer and progress to AIDS more slowly. [Jordan, BMJ
2002;324:757.]
(Source: http://www.avert.org/evidence.htm)
Myth: Antiretroviral Medications
(ARVs) Make People Sicker
ARVs do sometimes have unpleasant side effects. But remember: (1) often
people are put on ARVs because they're already becoming sick with a low
CD4 count and/or clinical AIDS symptoms, and they're no panacea, so
it's no surprise if people on ARVs still look sick, and (2) they might
be sicker or dead if they weren't on the ARVs. Studies have proven that
ARVs are safe and effective for treating clinical AIDS. The death rate
is lower for those on ARVs than those not treated.
Myth: Antiretroviral Medications (ARVs) are
Poisons
ARVs have been proven safe and effective in controlled clinical trials
for treating HIV infection and clinical AIDS. Like most medications,
they have side effects, but that doesn't make them "poisons." Studies
have proven that the proper use of ARVs extends, not shortens, the
patient's lifespan on average.
Myth: AZT Does More Harm Than Good
BW002 trial showed only 1 of 145 patients treated with AZT died vs. 19
of 137 on placebo; 24 on AZT had opportunistic infections vs. 45 on
placebo. [NIAID citing Fischl et al, "The efficacy of azidothymidine
(AZT)...." N Engl J Med. 1987 Jul 23;317(4):185-91.] ACTG016 trial
showed that HIV+ patients with CD4 counts of 200-500 on AZT were less
likely to experience disease progression. [NIAID citing Fischl et al,
"The Safety ..." Ann Intern Med. 1990 May 15;112(10):727-37.]
Myth: AZT Does Not Prevent
Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV
From aidstruth: "four AZT versus placebo trials have demonstrated that
AZT significantly reduces the risk of mother-to-child transmission of
HIV." [Brocklehurst P et al. (2006) "Antiretrovirals for reducing the
risk of mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection." The Cochrane
Database of Systematic Reviews 2006 Issue 2.]
Myths About the Latency Period
Myth: I'm HIV Positive and
Healthy, So HIV Must Be Harmless
HIV infection doesn't usually lead to clinical AIDS immediately.
There's usually a long latency period that may last many years in a
healthy HIV positive person before they develop clinical AIDS. So the
fact that a person is HIV positive and healthy doesn't mean that HIV
doesn't cause AIDS.
Myth: A Celebrity or
Friend is HIV Positive and Healthy, So HIV Must Not Cause AIDS
HIV infection doesn't usually lead to clinical AIDS immediately.
There's usually a long latency period that may last many years in a
healthy HIV positive person before they develop clinical AIDS. Use of
antiretroviral medications may extend that period further. So the fact
that a person is HIV positive and healthy doesn't mean that HIV doesn't
cause AIDS.
Myth: Many People With HIV Have Not
Developed AIDS, So HIV Must Not Cause AIDS
From NIAID "Evidence:" "The median
period of time between infection
with HIV and the onset of clinically apparent disease is approximately
10 years in industrialized countries, according to prospective studies
of homosexual men .... Similar
estimates ... have been made for HIV-infected
blood-transfusion recipients, injection-drug users and adult
hemophiliacs." [Alcabes
et al. Epidemiol Rev 1993;15:303] All but a few
progress to AIDS within 20 years. ["Course of HIV Infection",
NIH, 1995]
Myth: Some HIV+ People Have Gone
Twenty or More Years Without Developing AIDS, So HIV Must Not Cause AIDS
From NIAID "Relationship:" The
course of HIV varies. About 5% show "no signs of disease progression
even after 12 or more years." [Pantaleo et al,N Eng J Med
1995;332:209-16.Cao et al,N Engl J Med 1995;332(4):201-8.] Patient age
and genes, viral strain, and other infections may "determine the rate
and severity of HIV disease expression in different people."
[Fauci,Science 1993;262(3136):1011-8.Pantaleo et al,N Engl J Med
1993;328(5):327-35.]
Myth: I Know Someone Who
Stopped Taking ARVs and They're Still Healthy, So HIV Must Not Cause
AIDS
If a person is taking antiretroviral medications (ARVs) and then stops,
they won't necessarily develop clinical AIDS right away. So the fact
that some people stop and remain healthy for a while doesn't mean HIV
doesn't cause AIDS. VERY IMPORTANT: stopping ARV medications may
increase your risk of developing a strain of HIV that's resistant to
your current medications (and possibly others too), so ALWAYS talk to
your doctor before changing your ARV medication dosage or stopping.
Myths About Condoms
Condoms Provide Imperfect Protection
Against HIV Because Latex Pores Are Larger Than HIV
Condoms are not "total" protection against HIV, but it has nothing to
do with "pore size." A condom has multiple layers of latex and the
pores in latex don't overlap. Air and water molecules are smaller than
latex pores, but a condom will still hold air or water like a balloon
because the pores don't overlap. For the same reason, condoms reduce
the risk of HIV transmission even though a single latex pore would be
larger than an HIV virion.
Myths About Circumcision
Myth: Male Circumcision
Doesn't Reduce a Man's Risk of Contracting HIV Through Heterosexual Sex
There is now strong evidence from three randomized controlled trials
undertaken in Kisumu, Kenya, Rakai District, Uganda (funded by the US
National Institutes of Health) and Orange Farm, South Africa (funded by
the French National Agency for Research on AIDS) that male circumcision
reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by
approximately 60%." [WHO, "WHO and UNIADS announce recommendations from
expert consultation ..." 28 March 2007]
Myth: Studies in
Africa on Circumcision for HIV Prevention Were Not Completed
It's not that the studies "were not completed." They were ended early
because the protective effect was so strong that it would have been
unethical to continue the study further and deny the uncircumcised men
the opportunity to benefit from the results. Statistically significant
results (hugely significant, actually) were achieved.
Myth:
Circumcision Only Prevents HIV Transmission Because of Initial
Abstinence After the Procedure
One of the 3 African studies confirmed that the initial abstinent
period wasn't the cause of the effect. "(c) To analyze the impact of
the 6-wk period of abstinence, the analysis was repeated with the
duration of the period M1--M3 reduced by 42 d in the intervention
group." [Bertran Auvert et al, "Randomized, Controlled Intervention
Trial of Male Circumcision for Reduction of HIV Infection Risk: The
ANRS 1265 Trial." PLoS Med. 2005 November; 2(11): e298.]
Myth: Higher Male
Circumcision Rates in Countries Correlate With Higher HIV Rates
Actually, there is a correlation between LOW rates of circumcision and
HIGH rates of HIV. "Four ecological studies show the clear geographical
correlation of high HIV prevalence and areas where male circumcision is
rare." [Wilson & de Beyer, "Male Circumcision: Evidence and
Implications," HIV/AIDS M&E - Getting Results, World Bank Global
AIDS Program, citing Auvert et all 2001, UNAIDS 2004, USAID/AIDSMark
2003. See related Mehendale 1996, Gray 2000, Cameron 1989.]
Myth: Male
Circumcision Increases a Female Partner's Risk of Contracting HIV
Studies have not shown statistically significant evidence that male
circumcision increase the risk of female partners contracting HIV. At
the time of circumcision, men are counseled not to resume sexual
activity until the wound has completely healed. If they and their
partners follow that advice, there's no evidence of increased HIV
transmission to female partners. [AIDSmap, CROI: Circumcising HIV
positive men may increase HIV infections in female partners, but fewer
STIs seen]
Myth: Men or Women Will
Assume Circumcision Guarantees HIV Prevention and Have Unprotected Sex,
Increasing HIV Transmission
Studies tested "medically performed circumcision WITH COUNSELING."
Counseling educated the men that circumcision isn't a guarantee against
infection. Might women erroneously think that circumcision (or a
condom) is a guarantee against contracting HIV? Sure. But that's an
argument FOR good HIV education, not AGAINST circumcision. Studies show
a net reduction by circumcision of HIV transmission to men of 50+% and
no statistically significant increase in HIV transmission to female
partners.
Discredited Alternative Theories
Myth: AIDS is Just a Collection of
Other Diseases
HIV is a specific virus that has been imaged on electron micrographs
and whose genetic sequence has been thoroughly studied. AIDS is a
specific syndrome that has been clearly defined. Patients can be
reliably diagnosed as having or not having AIDS. Different doctors will
make the same diagnosis with high reliability, and the diagnosis has
predictive value for the future course of the patient's health as well
as for selecting treatments that can influence the outcome.
Myth: AIDS Is Caused By Recreational
Drug Use (Such As 'Poppers')
NIAID:
In a Vancouver study of "715 homosexual men .... Among 365 HIV-positive
individuals, 136 developed AIDS. No AIDS-defining illnesses occurred
among 350 seronegative men despite the fact that these men reported
appreciable use of inhalable nitrites ('poppers') and other
recreational drugs ...." For HIV+, 101 AIDS-related deaths; for HIV-,
0. CD4 counts dropped for HIV+, stable for HIV-, regardless of nitrite
inhalant use. [Schechter et al, Lancet, 1993 Mar 13;341(8846):658-9]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
NIAID: "The recreational use of
nitrite inhalants ('poppers') also predates the AIDS epidemic ....
Since the early years of the AIDS epidemic, the use of nitrite
inhalants has declined dramatically among homosexual men, yet the
number of AIDS cases continues to increase." [Israelstam, Br J Addict
Alcohol Other Drugs 1978;73(3):319-20. Haverkos, NIDA research
monograph 83, US Dept HHS, PHS, ADAMHA. GPO, 1988. Ostrow, AIDS
1990;4(8):759-65 & J Subst Abuse 1993;5(4):311-25. Lau Int J STD
AIDS 92]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: AIDS is a "Lifestyle Disease"
"Other viral infections, bacterial
infections, sexual behavior patterns and drug abuse patterns do not
predict who develops AIDS. Individuals from diverse backgrounds,
including heterosexual men and women, homosexual men and women,
hemophiliacs, sexual partners of hemophiliacs and transfusion
recipients, injection-drug users and infants have all developed AIDS,
with the only common denominator being their infection with HIV."
(NIAID Fact Sheet on Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS)
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/evidhiv.htm)
NIAID: "Relationship Between HIV
and AIDS": "Newborn infants have no behavioral risk factors, yet 6,209
children in the United States have developed AIDS through Dec. 31, 1994
(CDC, 1995a) .... of infants born to HIV-infected mothers, only the
15-40 percent of infants who become HIV-infected before or during birth
go on to develop immunosuppression and AIDS, while babies who are not
HIV-infected do not develop AIDS."
[Katz89,d'Arminio90,Prober91,ECS91,Lambert90,Lindgren91,Andiman90,
& others.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: Severe
Immunosuppression Typical of AIDS is Common in HIV- People
NIAID: "[T]he specific immunologic
profile that typifies AIDS--a progressive reduction of CD4+ T cells
resulting in persistent CD4+ T lymphocytopenia and profound deficits in
cellular immunity--is extraordinarily rare in the absence of HIV
infection or other known causes of immunosuppression." [Fauci AS, "CD4+
T-lymphocytopenia without HIV infection ..." N Engl J Med
1993;328(6):429-31. Laurence J, "T-cell subsets in health, infectious
disease ..." Ann Intern Med 1993;119(1):55-62.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: Low CD4 Counts are Common in
Gay Men Even If They're HIV-
NIAID: "22,643 CD4+ T cell
determinations in 2,713 HIV-seronegative homosexual men revealed only
one individual with a CD4+ T cell count persistently lower than 300
cells/mm3, and this individual was receiving immunosuppressive
therapy." [Vermund SH, Hoover DR, Chen K. CD4+ counts in seronegative
homosexual men. N Engl J Med 1993a;328(6):442. Se also Smith et al,
"Unexplained opportunistic infections and CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia
without HIV infection" N Engl J Med 1993;328(6):373-9.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: AIDS-Like Symptoms
Are Common in Gay Men Even If They're HIV-
NIAID "Relationship Between HIV
and AIDS": "Among 206 HIV-seronegative heterosexual and 526
HIV-seronegative homosexual or bisexual men, only one had consistently
low CD4+ T cell counts .... he had general lymphopenia rather than a
selective loss of CD4+ T cells. No AIDS-defining clinical condition was
observed among these HIV-seronegative men." [Sheppard et al, "CD4+
T-lymphocytopenia without HIV infection," N Engl J Med
1993;28(25):1847-8.]
NIAID "Relationship
Between HIV
and AIDS:"
Myth: Low CD4 Counts are Common
Among Drug Users Even If They're HIV-
NIAID: "Longitudinal studies of
injection-drug users have demonstrated that unexplained CD4+ T
lymphocytopenia is almost never seen among HIV-seronegative individuals
in this population, despite a high risk of exposure to hepatitis B,
cytomegalovirus and other blood-borne pathogens." [Des Jarlais et al,
"CD4 lymphocytopenia among injecting drug users in New York City," J
Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1993;6:(7)820-2. Weiss et al, "Idiopathic
CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia," Lancet 1992;340:608-9.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: Long Term Drug Use
Can Cause AIDS In HIV- People
NIAID: "[I]nvestigators compared
86 HIV-seronegative individuals who had been injecting drugs for a mean
of 7.6 years with 70 HIV-seropositive people who had injected drugs for
a mean of 9.1 years .... By 1994, there were 25 deaths attributable to
AIDS-defining conditions in the seropositive group; among
HIV-seronegative individuals, eight deaths occurred, none due to
AIDS-defining diseases." [Cohen J, "Could drugs, rather than a virus,
be the cause of AIDS?" Science 1994a;266(5191):1648-9.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: Low CD4 Counts are Common
NIAID "Relationship Between HIV
and AIDS": "Studies of blood donors, recipients of blood and blood
products, and household and sexual contacts of transfusion recipients
also suggest that persistently low CD4+ T cell counts are extremely
rare in the absence of HIV infection." [Aledort et al, "Low CD4+ counts
in a study of transfusion safety," N Engl J Med 1993;328(6):441-2.
Busch et al, "Screening of blood donors for idiopathic CD4+
T-lymphocytopenia," Transfusion 1994;34(3):192-7.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: People Diagnosed with AIDS are
Often HIV-
NIAID: "In a CDC survey, only 47
(.02 percent) of 230,179 individuals diagnosed with AIDS were both
HIV-seronegative and had persistently low CD4+ T cell counts
(<300/MM3) IN THE ABSENCE OF CONDITIONS OR THERAPIES ASSOCIATED WITH
IMMUNOSUPPRESSION." [Smith et al, "Unexplained opportunistic infections
and CD4+ T-lymphocytopenia without HIV infection. An investigation of
cases in the United States," N Engl J Med 1993;328(6):373-9.]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: Hemophiliacs Develop AIDS for
Reasons Other Than HIV
NIAID: "mean CD4+ T cell counts
among 161 HIV-seronegative hemophiliacs was 784/mm3; among 715
HIV-seropositive hemophiliacs, the mean CD4+ T cell count was 253/mm3."
[Lederman,J Infect Dis 1995;172(1):228-31.] "In another study, no
instances of AIDS-defining illnesses were seen among 402
HIV-seronegative hemophiliacs treated with factor therapy or in 83
hemophiliacs who received no treatment subsequent to 1979." [Aledort,N
Engl J Med 1993;328(6):441-2. Mosley,N Engl J Med 1993;328(15):1129.]
Myth: Long Lifetime Exposure to
Things Other than HIV Causes AIDS in Hemophiliacs
NIAID: "Among HIV-seronegative
patients with hemophilia A enrolled in the Transfusion Safety Study, no
significant differences in CD4+ T cell counts were noted between 79
patients with no or minimal factor treatment and 53 patients with the
largest amount of lifetime treatments .... from 100,000 to 2,000,000 U
... [Hassett J et al. Effect on lymphocyte subsets of clotting factor
therapy in human immunodeficiency virus-1-negative congenital clotting
disorders. Blood 1993;82(4):1351-7.]
Myths About the Scientific Method
Claim: Science Means
Asking Questions
Science does involve asking questions. But not all questions are still
worthwhile topics for serious debate by rational, informed people. I
can ask whether the Earth is really round, or whether it really orbits
the Sun, but it is a waste of time; the evidence for the answer is
overwhelming. The evidence that HIV causes AIDS is equally
overwhelming. There is a consensus in the relevant scientific community
that HIV is the cause of AIDS.
Claim: Everyone Has The Right To An
Opinion
You have the right to an opinion about any subject. But that doesn't
mean your opinion is correct, valuable, or even harmless. The members
of the Flat Earth Society have the right to an opinion about whether
the Earth is round, but astronauts will be killed if they make plans
based on that opinion. Similarly, there's a risk that people will
contract HIV, develop AIDS, and die if they make unsafe choices based
on a scientifically groundless opinion that HIV doesn't cause AIDS.
HIV Denialists
Claim: HIV Denialists Have Good
Intentions
Even if HIV denialists are trying to make an impact for the good of
humanity, they're still dangerous and doing great harm by acting on bad
information--just like the judges at the Salem witch trials, and the
promoters of lobotomies in the 1960s or of bone marrow transplants for
breast cancer in the 1990s. All of these people had good intentions and
were trying to help humanity but caused problems because they didn't
use the scientific method. The road to hell is paved with good
intentions.
Claim: How Can Reading an
Alternative View Be Harmful?
Reading an "alternative view" can be dangerous when (a) the
"alternative view" is scientifically incorrect and the reader isn't
scientifically literate enough to know the difference, and (b) the
layperson then makes dangerous choices, harmful to himself or others,
based on incorrect information in the "alternative view." There are
"alternative views" to the claim that the Earth is round--but
astronauts will die if they plan flights on those "alternative views"!
Ignoring HIV research also kills.
Myth: HIV Denialists Have Been Suppressed,
Censored, or Excluded
No one has suppressed anything. The HIV denialists have put their
claims on the Internet and in videos on YouTube and Google Video, have
published books, and have been covered in numerous magazines. They have
been unable to get their claims published in peer-reviewed scientific
journals because they are not applying the scientific method or doing
valid scientific research that passes the standards for publication.
They are ignoring valid research findings and spinning conspiracy
theories.
Myth: Referring to Someone as an HIV
Denialist is Name Calling
A "denialist" is a person who stubbornly denies a fact that has been
proven beyond any reasonable doubt even though overwhelming evidence
proving the fact is readily available and independently testable by
anyone who wishes to do so. Examples include moon landing, Holocaust,
HIV causes AIDS, and round Earth denialists. This is not name calling;
it's calling a spade a spade. Denialists ignore evidence published in
peer-reviewed scientific journals and fail to publish evidence of their
own.
Myth: HIV Denialists and Those
Who Say HIV Causes AIDS are Just 'Opposing Viewpoints'
We are not just one "opposing viewpoint" equal to and no different than
the HIV denialist "opposing viewpoint" any more than people who say
humans landed on the moon are just one "opposing viewpoint" to those
who claim it was a hoax. Both HIV as the cause of AIDS and humans
landing on the moon have been proven by studies published in scientific
journals. HIV denialist claims are not. So don't flatter yourself by
equating the two as "opposing viewpoints."
Christine Maggiore, founder of
AliveAndWell.org, Says ...
Christine Maggiore, the founder of aliveandwell dot org, knew she was
HIV+. While pregnant with her daughter Eliza Jane Scovill, she did not
take the ARVs that would reduce the risk of mother-to-child
transmission of HIV. She breast fed, which also increases the risk of
HIV transmission. She chose not to have her daughter tested for HIV. On
May 16, 2005, Eliza Jane Scovill died at age three. The L.A. County
Coroner found the cause of Eliza's death was pneumonia as a result of
untreated AIDS.
HIV Tests
Myth: HIV Test Results Are Not
Specific
or Accurate
Myth: There Is A High Rate of
False Positives When People Are Tested for HIV
Testing is specific &
accurate. "A large study of HIV testing in 752 U.S. laboratories
reported a sensitivity of 99.7% and specificity of 98.5% .... and
studies in U.S. blood donors reported specificities of 99.8% and
greater than 99.99% (46, 47). With confirmatory Western blot, the
chance of a false-positive identification in a low-prevalence setting
is about 1 in 250 000 (95% CI, 1 in 173 000 to 1 in 379 000) (48)."
(Chou et al, Annals of Internal Medicine, 5 July 05, vol 143, #1, p
55-73)
(Source: http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/143/1/55)
"The performance of four enzyme
immunoassays, manufactured by Abbott,
Diagnostics Pasteur, Genetic Systems, and Organon Teknika, for the
combined detection of anti-human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)
and anti-HIV-2, was examined .... Sensitivity estimates in the four
assays were 99.71, 99.94, 99.49, and 99.68% .... Specificity estimates
from blood donations were 99.92, 99.46, 99.67, and 99.85% ..." [Silvester et al. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum
Retrovirol 1995;8:411]
Claim: Many Other Things Can
Cause a False Positive HIV Test
Various things may cause a false positive on a single HIV laboratory
test. But when a person is tested for HIV, multiple independent
laboratory tests are used. The separate laboratory tests catch each
other's errors, so the HIV test result for the person is highly
accurate. The chance of a false positive in a low-prevalence setting is
about 1 in 250,000. For more, see Chou et al, Annals of Internal Medicine,
5 July 05, vol 143, #1, p 55-73.
(Source: http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/143/1/55)
Claim: HIV Test Bottles or
Documentation Say There's No Standard for Being HIV Positive
Those are only standard legal
disclaimers. "A large study of HIV testing in 752 U.S. laboratories
reported a sensitivity of 99.7% and specificity of 98.5% .... and
studies in U.S. blood donors reported specificities of 99.8% and
greater than 99.99% (46, 47). With confirmatory Western blot, the
chance of a false-positive identification in a low-prevalence setting
is about 1 in 250 000 (95% CI, 1 in 173 000 to 1 in 379 000) (48)."
(Chou et al,Annals of Internal Medicine,5 July 05,v143#1,p55-73)
(Source: http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/143/1/55)
Claim: HIV Test Results
Are Interpreted Differently in Different Countries
There are many tests for HIV used in different ways and combinations.
The standards for use and interpretation may vary slightly in different
countries, but any person who has received a positive result on an HIV
test should have a "Western blot" (WB) test for confirmation. As the San Francisco AIDS Foundation
notes: "False positive results are extremely rare with the WB, so it
confirms (proves) that HIV antibodies are present."
(Source: http://www.sfaf.org/aids101/hiv_testing.html)
Claim: p24 Antigen Test is Inaccurate
From Wikipedia's entry on Accuracy
of HIV Testing: The p24
antigen test "is no longer used routinely in the US[4] or the EU[5] to
screen blood donations .... Nucleic acid testing (NAT) is more
effective .... The p24 antigen test is not useful for general
diagnostics, as it has very low sensitivity and only works during a
certain time period after infection before the body produces antibodies
to the p24 protein."
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV_test#Accuracy_of_HIV_testing)
Myth: The Food and Drug Administration
Has Not Approved HIV Tests
Go to Google and type in "Donor Screening Assays for Infectious Agents
and HIV Diagnostic Assays". This will take you to the page on the FDA
web site listing tests that have been approved for diagnosing HIV
infection.
Myth: Having Antibodies Means
You're Immune to a Disease
Having antibodies to a virus does not necessarily mean that your body
is now immune to that virus. It only means that your body has been
exposed to the virus (or to a vaccine) and has generated antibodies in
response. The immune system is able to develop protective immunity to
some viruses but not all viruses. Unfortunately, HIV is one of the
viruses that the body is able to fight but not to eliminate and develop
protective immunity against on its own.
NIAID: Many viruses are pathogenic
even after antibodies appear [Oldstone MB, "Viral persistence," Cell
1989;56(4):517-20], including polio [Kurth R, "Does HIV cause AIDS?"
Intervirology 1990;31(6):301-14], measles [Gershon AA in Principles and
Practices of Infectious Diseases, 3rd ed. NY: Churchill Livingstone,
1990, pp. 1279-84.], cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex, and varicella
zoster [Weiss & Jaffe, "Duesberg, HIV and AIDS (commentary)" Nature
1990;345:659-60.].
Myth: Infants Born to HIV+
Mothers Go from HIV+ to HIV-
This confuses different things. Many infants born to HIV+ mothers will
have antibodies to HIV, produced by the mother, present in their blood.
But that doesn't make them HIV+. The infants are only considered HIV+
if they still have antibodies after 18 months (long enough for maternal
antibodies to disappear) or a PCR test shows presence of the virus
itself. So they don't "lose HIV+ status." If they only had maternal
antibodies and were uninfected with HIV, they were never HIV+.
Myths About the Origin of HIV
Myth: Humans Created HIV
There's no evidence that HIV was created by humans. It has been found
in stored blood samples as far back as 1959. At that time, humans
hadn't even discovered retroviruses, much less developed the technology
to design a new one. Genetic studies provide evidence that it jumped to
humans from a similar virus in primates. For some old stored samples,
we even have the clinical history of patients who died of
then-unexplained symptoms which in retrospect were clearly clinical
AIDS.
Myth: Humans Created HIV in
1973 ... or 1979 ... (or Any Date After 1959)
HIV has been detected in stored blood samples dating all the way back
to 1959. [Nahmias et al. Evidence for human infection with an HTLV
III/LAV-like virus in Central Africa, 1959 (letter). Lancet
1986;31,1(8492):1279-80.] That wouldn't be possible if the virus had
been created by man in 1973. Evidence shows that human HIV jumped to
humans from a similar primate virus.
Myth: HIV Was Created and Spread By Culturing of
Oral Polio Vaccine in Monkey Cells in the 1950s (Edward Hooper's Theory
from "The River")
The oral polio theory of HIV's
origins has been debunked. See the wikipedia
article on HIV under
"Origin and discovery" for details. Briefly, genetic studies show
HIV
originates to about 1931, not to the 1950s; a sample of the original
vaccine was found and shown not to have HIV; and macaque kidney cells,
which can't culture HIV or SIV, were used during vaccine preparation.
Myth: If AIDS Spread Virally We Would
Have Seen an Epidemic Thousands of Years Ago
No, genetic studies show HIV probably jumped to humans in the 1930s.
The fact that HIV had spread to a small number of humans by 1959
doesn't mean an epidemic would occur right away. HIV spreads slowly
compared to airborne viruses, so it would take a long time for it to
grow to the numbers we see today. It started in impoverished Africa
where initial cases would be overlooked. Road building and urbanization
in Africa, air travel, increased multi-partner sex, and sharing needles
sped the spread.
Myths About HIV Transmission
Myth: Transfusion Studies Didn't Show
that HIV Causes AIDS
NIAID: In a study, 3 years after
transfusion, "mean CD4+ T cell count in 64 HIV-negative recipients was
850/mm3, while 111 HIV-seropositive individuals had average CD4+ T cell
counts of 375/mm3." [Donegan et al. Ann Intern Med 1990;113(10):733-9.]
"By 1993, there were 37 cases of AIDS in the HIV-infected group, but
not a single AIDS-defining illness in the HIV-seronegative transfusion
recipients." [Cohen, "Duesberg and critics agree: hemophilia is the
best test" Science 1994;266(5191):1645-6.]
Myth: Studies of Hemophiliacs
Didn't Show HIV is Contagious and Causes AIDS
Studies of Hemophiliacs Didn't Show HIV
is Transmitted Through Heterosexual Sex
NIAID: As of 1991, "10 to 20
percent of wives and sex partners of male HIV-positive hemophiliacs in
the United States are also HIV-infected (Pitchenik et al., 1984; Kreiss
et al., 1985; Peterman et al., 1988; Smiley et al., 1988; Dietrich and
Boone, 1990; Lusher et al., 1991). Through December 1994, the CDC
had received reports of 266 cases of AIDS in those who had sex with a
person with hemophilia (CDC, 1995a). These data cannot be explained by
a non-infectious theory of AIDS etiology."
Full references for above:
[Pitchenik AE et al. The acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in the wife
of a hemophiliac. Ann Intern Med 1984;100(1):62-5. Kreiss JK et al.
Antibody to human T-lymphotropic virus type III in wives of
hemophiliacs. Evidence for heterosexual transmission. Ann Intern Med
1985;102(5):623-6. Peterman TA et al. Risk of human immunodeficiency
virus transmission from heterosexual adults with transfusion-associated
infections. JAMA 1988;259(1):55-8. Smiley ML et al. Transmission of
human immunodeficiency virus to sexual partners of hemophiliacs. Am J
Hematol 1988;28(1):27-32. Dietrich SL, Boone DC. The epidemiology of
HIV infection in hemophiliacs. In: Nilsson, Berntrop, eds. Recent
Advances in Hemophilia Care. New York: Alan R. Liss, 1990, pp. 79-86.
Lusher JM, et al. Risk of human immunodeficiency virus type 1
infection among sexual and nonsexual household contacts of persons with
congenital clotting disorders. Pediatrics 1991;88(2):242-9. CDC.
HIV/AIDS surveillance report, 1994 year-end edition. 1995a;6(no.2).]
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: HIV Isn't Transmitted
Sexually
Sexual contact is the most common way HIV is transmitted.
Myth: There's No Evidence
that HIV Spreads via Heterosexual Sex
Proof of HIV contagion through heterosexual sex is overwhelming
including infections of sexual partners of HIV+ hemophiliacs, HIV+
injection drugs users, and HIV+ health care workers where the partners
had no other HIV exposure or risk factors.
NIAID: As of 1991, "10 to 20
percent of wives and sex partners of male HIV-positive hemophiliacs in
the United States are also HIV-infected (Pitchenik et al., 1984; Kreiss
et al., 1985; Peterman et al., 1988; Smiley et al., 1988; Dietrich and
Boone, 1990; Lusher et al., 1991). "
(Source: http://www.niaid.nih.gov/publications/hivaids/all.htm)
Myth: Nancy Padian's 1997 Study Showed HIV
Isn't Transmitted Via Heterosexual Sex
Nancy Padian writes: "the evidence for the sexual transmission of HIV
is well documented, conclusive, and based on the standard,
uncontroversial methods and practices of medical science. Individuals
who cite the 1997 Padian et al. publication (1) .... in an attempt to
substantiate the myth that HIV is not transmitted sexually are ill
informed, at best. Their misuse of these results is misleading,
irresponsible, and potentially injurious to the public." (aidstruth)
Myth: HIV Must Not Be Transmitted Via
Heterosexual Sex Since We Don't See Many Women Who Are HIV+ or Have AIDS
From NIAID "Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS:" 30% of new HIV infections
in 1998 in the U.S. were in women. The number of female AIDS patients
has risen as well. In 1998, about 23% of U.S. adult/adolescent AIDS
cases were in women, and AIDS was the fifth leading cause of death
among women 25-44 and the third leading cause among African-American
women in the same age range. [US Census Bureau HIV/AIDS Surveillance
Data Base]
From NIAID "Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS:" "In Africa, HIV was first
recognized in sexually active heterosexuals, and AIDS cases in Africa
have occurred at least as frequently in women as in men. Overall, the
worldwide distribution of HIV infection and AIDS between men and women
is approximately 1 to 1." [UNAIDS 2000]
Myth: There Is No Heterosexual
Epidemic of HIV
There is an epidemic of AIDS among heterosexuals in Africa.
Myth: [HIV+ Celebrity's]
Sexual Partner Didn't Become HIV+, So HIV Must Not Be Infectious/Spread
Sexually
Scientists are not claiming that every sexual partner (even an
exclusive partner) of an HIV+ person will necessarily become HIV+. For
example, if an HIV+ person has sex with an HIV- person, they might
choose to reduce the risk by using a condom and other barrier
prevention methods. The fact that a particular HIV+ person's partner(s)
didn't become HIV+ doesn't mean that HIV *never* spreads between sexual
partners.
Myth: Prostitutes Don't Have
Increased Rates of HIV, So HIV Must Not Spread Through Heterosexual Sex
Prostitutes are one of the highest risk groups for HIV/AIDS.
Myth: HIV is a Primarily Male or
Primarily Gay Male Disease
Globally by 2002 half of HIV+ people were female as were 1.2M of the
2.5M deaths from AIDS that year. (source: UN report, Nov. 2002)
Myth: There's No Evidence for
HIV Superinfection (Infection With Multiple Strains of HIV)
"It is now known that dual HIV infection, defined as the presence of
two distinct HIV strains in a patient, can occur. The best evidence for
this phenomenon is the existence of recombinant viruses that contain
genetic material from two different parental strains. Recombinant
viruses can only be created by the simultaneous replication of the two
parental strains in the same patient." [Joel Blankson, "HIV
Superinfection: Can Patients Be Infected Twice?" Johns Hopkins AIDS
Service May 2004]
See also Jost S et al. A patient with HIV-1 superinfection. N Engl J
Med 2002 Sep 5; 347:731-6. "Jost and colleagues report a convincing and
well-documented case of HIV superinfection in a man exposed to
genetically distinct strains of HIV .... We now know that HIV
superinfection is possible in humans." [Diane Havlir, "A Case Worth
Noting: HIV Superinfection," Journal Watch Infectious Diseases
September 20, 2002.]
Conspiracy Theories and Conflict of Interest
Question: Why Should We Trust the 'Medical
Establishment' or These Videos?
Neither I nor Dr. Kuhn recommend that you blindly trust anyone. That's
why all of the statements in the videos are based on the results of
research study results published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
When a study's methodology & results are published, anyone who
doesn't believe a result can repeat the experiment to verify it for
themselves. Replication catches errors and prevents fraud. This is the
scientific method.
Claim: 'Medical Establishment' Claims that
HIV Causes AIDS are 'Propaganda'
Calling the peer-reviewed scientific journal research study results
"propaganda" is illogical. "Propaganda" is information spread widely
with the goal of harming someone/something else. Scientific journals
just document the methodology and results of studies so other can
review, catch errors, learn, and replicate. You can only get a study
published if you do a replicable study and document your methods &
results, so journal study results are limited to what is provable and
replicable.
Claim: 'Medical
Establishment' Is Evil / Greedy / Motivated By Money / Arrogant / Makes
Mistakes
Even if everything you say about the "medical establishment" were true,
it wouldn't change the overwhelming scientific evidence published in
peer-reviewed scientific journals that HIV is the cause of AIDS.
Claim: Medical Establishment is
Lying that HIV Causes AIDS Because They Get Money Through Research
It's not credible to suggest that NIH, CDC, WHO, UNAIDS, Pasteur
Institute,
AMA, 10s of 1000s of scientists worldwide, numerous NGOs, and the
millions of patients who are doing better on ARV medication are all
lying for money:
conspiracies that large break down.
Claim: Scientists Saying HIV Causes AIDS
Are LIke a Cult
A cult is a closed belief system that is not subject to external test
or validation. HIV denialism has the characteristics of a cult: closed
belief system, ignores all the scientific evidence, demonizes those who
disagree, etc. By contrast, our videos are all based on published
scientific research studies. Anyone who doubts those studies is free to
replicate and confirm the results for themselves. The scientific method
explicitly ENABLES external test and validation.
Additional Resources