Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses: Rapid Responses published:
-
![[Read Rapid Response]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
Ideological barriers
- Dr John Rumbold (13 November 2004)
-
Breaking down 'HIV' Ideological barriers
- Alexander H Russell (16 November 2004)
|
|
|||
|
Dr John Rumbold, n/a West Midlands
Send response to journal:
|
The barriers are not just financial and logistical but also ideological. Has Peter Mugyenyi found that HIV denialists have had a major influence or not on HAART programmes? Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Alexander H Russell, artist/writer/philosopher WC1N 1PE
Send response to journal:
|
Dr. John Rumbold stated: "The barriers are not just financial and logistical but also ideological. Has Peter Mugyenyi found that HIV denialists have had a major influence or not on HAART programmes?" Why does Dr. Rumbold use the theological term 'HIV denialists' in a medico-scientific forum? Judging from his lack of scientific reasoning and argument in response to my many questions, Dr. Rumbold hides behind 'HIV' Ideological barriers through 'HIV' Theological rhetoric coming out with 'articles of faith' like 'HIV Infection' yet has no 'hard science' to back up this sound-bite slogan. Another arbitrary abstraction Dr. Rumbold uses without thinking critically is: 'HAART' (Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy). So-called 'HAART' is a mis-marketing misnomer since no 'retrovirus' has ever been isolated and proven to exist in the first place: 'retroviruses' are hypothetical constructs. I would like to ask Dr. Rumbold: what exactly does HAART target since no 'HIV' has ever been isolated from a single human being? Think carefully of what Robert Pirsig stated: "The real purpose of scientific method is to make sure Nature hasn't misled you into thinking something you don't actually know... One logical slip and an entire scientific edifice comes tumbling down. One false deduction about the machine and you can get hung up indefinitely." (Robert Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance). We see again and again at BMJ Rapid Responses the defenders of the 'HIV' party political line using ideology, sociology and theology as a substitute for their inability in presenting empirical scientific evidence for their arguments. As Dr. David Rasnick aptly observed: "As a scientist who has studied AIDS for 16 years, I have determined that AIDS has little to do with science and is not even primarily a medical issue. AIDS is a sociological phenomenon held together by fear, creating a kind of medical McCarthyism that has transgressed and collapsed all the rules of science, and imposed a brew of belief and pseudoscience on a vulnerable public." (Rasnick, D., Blinded by Science, Spin, June 1997). Can Dr. Rumbold answer my following legitimate and still unanswered questions: 1) Where is the proof that 'HIV' is actually - rather than supposedly - sexually transmitted? Recent reports from the UK and the USA show huge increases in STD rates but show no increases in hypothetical 'HIV' infections. Where is the evidence that 'HIV' is an STD? 2) Why does 'HIV' apparently discriminate against Western, non-drug using heterosexuals? Why is there still no heterosexual 'HIV' epidemic in the West but an alleged 'HIV' epidemic in South Africa? 3) What is the specific, definitive scientific paper that clearly demonstrates that 'HIV' causes 'AIDS'? We must all ask ourselves why is it that so many doctors are still so unquestioning about a retarded 'retroviral hypothesis' that has become a 'paradigm lost'? The hallmark of a viable hypothesis is that the predictions based upon it will be fulfilled: not one single prediction based upon the 'HIV/AIDS' hypothesis has ever come to pass. The barriers against rethinking, radically questioning and deconstructing the mass-tranced 'HIV' belief-system are not just theological but ideological. The 'HIV' Lie machine serves as an 'ideological-cement' binding the medico-scientific community together as a 'family' of 'true believers'. As Hitler observed: "The bigger the lie, the more people will believe in it." Competing interests: None declared |
|||