Does HIV mean certain death?
24 October 2009
Neville Hodgkinson on a new film that challenges the tenets of the Aids religion and exposes the dangerous confusion at the heart of the industry Seiko is collaborating with leaders and innovators in a variety of fields to celebrate the release of the Ananta Collection
In the quarter century since the world was introduced to the idea that a new sexually transmitted virus was the cause of Aids, HIV has been generally regarded as one of the biggest killers of our time. HIV/Aids has not been the mass disease in Britain that people were led to believe in the 1980s, but the death toll from immune deficiency diseases ascribed to HIV in Africa has been staggering. The scale of death there is an ongoing tragedy that tests the moral resolve of the rich world. How much do we care? Enough to ask hard questions about it? Enough to challenge the orthodoxy about the treatment, diagnosis and even the causes of Aids?
Anyone who attempts to do so soon realises the limits of acceptable debate. The HIV/Aids industry has long had the characteristics of a religion, but increasingly it is being revealed as a religion that has lost its way. Instead of fulfilling the legitimate purpose of inspiring charitable actions towards the millions in need, its most vocal representatives have become increasingly absorbed in denouncing ‘heresies’. It seems their purpose is not so much to cure, but to close down debate.
A scientist, activist or politician who so much as questions the orthodoxy is swiftly labelled a fool; or worse, someone responsible for the deaths of thousands, even millions, around the world. Any suggestion that there might be more to the disease than simply HIV, particularly in Africa, was to risk, and increasingly to guarantee, swift denunciation as a ‘denialist’. Once labelled in this way, the miscreant is considered beyond the pale of civilised society and scientific discourse. He is an idiot who can have his papers withdrawn, his funding cut off, and his contracts terminated. There have even been calls for denialists to be thrown in prison. This fervent self-righteousness, and the fear which accompanies it, has stifled scientific debate about Aids for years.
More articles from: Neville Hodgkinson | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
How the Tories can still win in Europe
Fraser NelsonSleepwalking into disaster in Afghanistan
John C. Hulsman
Pavel Stroilov
Listen up, Dave: to care is not to do
David FrumPopular Blogger Posts
1 Everything is now illuminated - Melanie Phillips
2 The still strong voice of a vanishing Britain - Melanie Phillips
3 Britain's least effective lobby? - Melanie Phillips
4 Britain: petty official capital of the world - Rod Liddle
5 Is This the Most Enraging Story of the Year? Perhaps! - Alex Massie
sponsored links
GASCONY
GASCONY, SW France, near Condom-en-Armagnac 13th Century stone house, 21st Century luxury for 12 in 5 en-suites. 50 acres +
BIG SAND STEEL BAND
IF YOU ARE PLANNING A CHAMPAGNE RECEPTION and looking for some light entertainment, you can now hire London's busiest steel
BOSC LEBAT, Tarn et Garonne.
BOSC LEBAT, SW France. Only 45 minutes from Toulouse Airport with daily flights from most provincial airports avoiding the horrors
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2009 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
JTD
October 25th, 2009 12:48am Report this commentCan you explain why the movie House of Numbers features Christine Maggiore so prominently but only mentions her death at the end as if trying to sneak this fact by the audience? Also, why does the film not delve into her death? This is one major flaw (of many) in this film. It is a glaring reason to question other supposed "facts" in this film.
JTD
Back to top