Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy

Seeking Stories of AIDS Denialism

Have you or someone you know been harmed by AIDS Denialism? If you, or someone you care about, have been advised to stop taking HIV meds, ignore HIV test results, purchase a 'natural' cure etc., please email me.

All information will be kept confidential.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

My AIDS Denialist Fan Club

Do you feel the love?

Readers of Denying AIDS have noticed that AIDS Denialists are busy spewing their venom my way.

Nothing unexpected.

I thought you might like to see some behind the scenes excerpts.

I would prefer not to include attack comments and hate mail in my regular posts. Still, Denialist attacks should have a place on my blog. Hence this post.

To start things off, here is an email that was circulated among the Rethinkers. Thanks for sending it my way! I probably should not disclose who was included on this email. I doubt that Claus, Henry, and Michael would appreciate it. So do not even bother to ask.

New: Scroll down comments to read a letter from AIDS Denialists to the University of Connecticut Department of Psychology ‘telling on me’. WARNING: Empty your bladder and sit down before reading to avoid potentially harmful or embarrassing accidents. Be prepared to laugh!
UPDATE: Celia Farber's new website, The Truth Barrier is up and running. Among the first posts is a review by Claus Jensen (who ever that is) of Denying AIDS. Thank you Claus. Your endorsement means much to me. Without a strong reaction from AIDS denialists Denying AIDS would have no credibility at all.

UPDATE: Henry Bauer has a new passion. Me! That's right. First Nessies and Aliens. Then AIDS. Now ME. Check out what Henry says will be dozens of Blog postings. Even Robert Gallo does not have a whole blog about him! Boy is Bauer pissed at me and Joe. Hopefully he will calm down or he might develop AIDS from the Seth-Stress.

Date: March 24, 2009 10:01:53 PM PDT
Subject: Kalichman

As I doubt you will get an answer to your question from Snout, I will share with you an example of what I consider Seth Kalichman's juvenile level of scholarship with a few notations by me. Examination of more of his pieces may be useful in exposing his insanities.

Following is a bit from Seth Kalichman's research projects. It seems obvious that he teaches what he most needs to learn. The following excerpts are from one of his papers called "
Coping and Safer Sex Maintenance Intervention for Men and Women Living with HIV-AIDS . A Group Leader’s Guide". In his guide for group leaders, Seth wrote the following.

First, Seth describes what qualities make an effective versus ineffective group facilitator. He should soon be an expert on this one. I loved the following:

Qualities of ineffective facilitators

Oriented toward individuals more than groups.

Places personal needs before group needs
Seth would never do that, now would he?

Anxious in groups Overly charismatic – needing to be the center for the group
Such as his latest attempt to be at the center of the battle to stop the damned aids denialists?

Has an “us versus them” mentality
Who? Seth Kalichman and his notoriously documented need to be the "us of hiv orthodoxy" versus the them of "those damned deranged aids denialists

Views self above the group
Such as his attempt to present himself as being all knowing about hiv/aids while never answering a single question that is posed to him, or while censoring on his blog all those who would correct him?

Needs to dominate the discussion
Such as is evidenced by his censoring nearly every post on his site that dissidents have written that show him to clearly be wrong

Inflexible and non-adaptive
Seth inflexible? Oh no, not Seth. He is the most open minded and most flexible individual (like a snake in the grass) that I have ever encountered

Physically and emotionally removed
Such as running off when he is exposed as wrong and as is displayed by his ignoring every pertinent and reasonable question asked of him

Begin with a discussion of stress factors in life. We all have things that create stress in everyday life.
Amazing how he easily notices this, except for one obvious exception: Except for Christine Maggiore, who Seth has portrayed as having had no stress at all after her daughter died of a reaction to amoxicillin and after she was relentlessly attacked in nationwide newspapers and magazines and blogsites and labeled an aids denialist mother whose aids denial and refusal to have her daughter tested or on aids drugs and thereby stood publicly acused and convicted as having caused the death of her daughter

Seth Continues

Some stressors are minor and easy to deal with, while other stressors are significant and can be overwhelming.
Unless your name is Christine Maggiore or you are an aids denialist, then whatever is thrown at you is because you had it coming and is not the cause of your illness because only hiv could do that

HIV can be a long-term stressor that is difficult to deal with.
How astute. Is he aware that suicide, both passive and direct, is the leading cause of death in those diagnosed as hiv infected sexual lepers? No mention anywhere by Seth of just how stressful such a diagnosis can be. And of course, in one is an aids dissident, then one's greatest stress often becomes how to stop the insanity of the hiv pushers such as Seth from destroying your life or the lives of those you love.

For some people HIV can be at the top of the list as a stressor, for others HIV may not be the number one stressor in life.
Oh really? And just how stressful can it be Seth?

In either case, HIV can present added problems and stress for you that can effect your health. WHAT??? Did I read that right? Seth Kalichman herein fully and publicly admits that STRESS can affect physical health??? If that is what he believes, then why did he ignore this when Christine was stressed to breaking as he fought vehemently to portray Christine's only problem as a lack of aids drugs? Why does he ignore that she was endlessly attacked in the media, including by him? Why does he ignore she had just been portrayed as a murderous denialist mother in a recent Law and Order episode just one month before she became ill? Why does he ignore the stress Christine was facing at the trial of the coroner that she was scheduled to testify at the week after she got ill and died? Why does Seth conveniently ignore the massive nonstep grief and stress that Christine was faced with?

For the group discussions, Seth's entire agenda seems to be created for kindergarteners, such as is evidenced right from the beginning of Seth's group meeting discussions. Seth recommends the following:

Select a partner… get to know each other Questions:

1. Who are you?

2. What is one thing you find stressful and how do you cope with it?

3. If this was your day and you could do anything you want, what would you be doing?
From there the activities of Seths group is to watch role playing movie clips with brief discussions centering on "what would you do if it were you" and "would this be stressful for you". Then Seth likely reveals to us his own real motivations in the following

The Stress of Hiding Parts of Ourselves: The Bird Cage, trying to be straight scene; Partners in Crime, Surgeon General scene.
trying to be straight? Could this be Seth's little secret? Highly likely.

Sometimes we all try to hide things about ourselves or things we’ve done from others and this can be stressful.
Ah Ha! Just what is it Seth is hiding about himself?

The group should enjoy the comical nature of the two clips and no discussion is necessary.
So just what IS IT THAT SETH the pseudopsychologist IS HIDING ABOUT HIMSELF? What seeming vile thing has he likely partaken in or that he is tempted to partake in that he has hidden even from his wife? Did he play the girlfriend role for his older brother or father when he was 10? Is it that Seth cruises the park at night for sexual encounters? Just what is it that Seth has done, as he seems to be clearly informing us that he too is hiding something from his loved ones? And furthermore, is it that Seth also uses his own fear of the hiv boogeyman to keep from acting out his own fantasies and desires? Does Seth also personally NEED the fear of aids?

Obviously SOMETHING is driving this man. Something he keeps well hidden. And whatever his motivation is, it is certainly not about being a loving compassionate would be savior to hiv positives nor is it a benevolent desire to save the world from suffering death by aids. Not for Seth. For Seth this is a very personal crusade.

And to answer your question about Seth's "scholarship"..... Read the paper. The astoundingly juvenile nature of his "best works" in psychology gives me sincere question as to how someone such as Seth ever got a degree, let alone a professorship, in of all things, psychology!


  1. Kalichman, you insufferable shrink. You read Duesburg and you still believe that HIV equals AIDS equals certain death. You're one dumb f#@k.

  2. Yet you wonder why the dissident position is not published in science journals when you yourself are guilty of the same censorship that the editors of Nature and Science and the New York Times and the aids advocates around the world have done.

    You are fully just as guilty as them of censorship and withholding information.

    Therefore, you are just as complicit as anyone in the genocide of gays and blacks.

  3. Dear Seth,
    Kindly read your own statement, posted just below, one more time, as it seems to be an amazingly accurate description of yourself, by your own self.

    Seth said: "What Is HIV/AIDS Denialism? AIDS denialism actively propagates myths, misconceptions, and misinformation to distort and refute reality. Denialism is the outright rejection of science and medicine. It involves actively contradicting and disregarding medical advice. It is steady state. Denialism is not open to criticism, and evades modification. Denialism is only open to additional evidence supporting its tenets and such evidence most often comes from the misuse of science and from pseudoscience. AIDS denialists, often for the sake of personal preservation or recognition, hold fast to old ideas in the face of new evidence".

    There is an old saying, Seth, that one teaches what they most need to learn. In psych 101, for those of us who actually paid attention, one very quickly learns about the fascinating human behavior of projecting onto others what they disown in themselves. You seem to be the perfect case example.

    Perhaps you should listen to yourself once in a while, don't yah think? You might even learn something.

    By the way, Seth, I would ask why you censored my post with my comments and questions to you and Ema that I had posted earlier, but no sense in my asking the obvious. You censored the post because it so clearly shows you and Ema to be wrong.

    Michael Geiger

  4. God has left a new comment on your post

    What have you done, Seth Kalichman?
    "Your brothers blood cries out to me from the ground".

  5. Hey Seth, you an anti-Semite yourself? It's not impossible
    Plus you do hang out with open anti-Semites (tip: scan for "Kike"). Just watch out, buddy - they say when you get in bed with the devil, sooner or later you gotta f*ck ;)
    Happy Crusading!

  6. Yeah, well it looks like Michael Geiger has been turning his highly trained and perspicacious psychological mind toward me as well. Supposedly I am like a Jew who survived extermination by the Nazis by volunteering as a guard at Auschwitz.

    I am also a traitor to the gay community and to mankind in general. Wow. All because I chose a Snouty screen-name and avatar? I thought it was cute.

    Still you can’t hide anything from Michael’s keen insight. I have, he’s sternly observed, admitted to being gay (which where I come from is a bit like admitting to be left handed, or ginger, or Lebanese, or a motor racing fan.)

    But Michael has my measure. Apparently my refusal to grasp the obvious truth that HIV has nothing to do with AIDS stems from a deep internalized self-loathing for being gay. It’s only my desperately clinging to the scientific consensus on HIV/AIDS that is preventing me from spiraling down into acting out my internal propensities for sexual addiction that I’m obviously prone to. Gee thanks for warning me, Michael. I was only a hair’s breadth from repudiating scientific reason, and succumbing to my innermost desire to become the Town Bike.

    I have to admit to being disappointed, though. As a Snout I was hoping my full psychosexual analysis would have been based on a reading of the correspondence between Freud and Fleiss*.

    It’s remarkable how much he’s been able to figure out about me. Fortunately, he’s got a 12 step program all lined up, just in case I can get past my obvious distaste for the “spiritual” aspects. What a guy. What a kook.

    * That’s Wilhelm, not Heidi.

  7. Holy crap!
    It looks like the comment section has caught teh crazy ... Well, I suppose that was to be expected when dealing with HIV denial. Anyhow, I'll have to pick up your book sometime soon.

  8. Turns out Mr. Seth,

    that the more I read and see from you regarding hiv and aids, the more I see you as I do the present administration and current leaders of wall street. Incompetent, lacking integrity, a coward, and a typical know-it-all fool. I see you as a sign of our times, and as regards hiv and aids, a continuation of the 25 year long problem of ignorance and refusal to open your eyes to the big picture, and the failure to heed.

    Leo Tolstoy had you pegged to a T when he said:

    "Most men can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their lives.” Leo Tolstoy

  9. "Most men can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their lives.” Leo Tolstoy

    Yep that pretty much describes denialists.

    Denialists: HIV isn't real! Look at Maggiore, she lived with no drugs and she is fine.

    Maggiore: *Dies of severe immune suppression*

    Denialists: That proves nothing to us! It was stress...stress and Law and Order! Maybe a holistic treatment, too!

    Everyone else: Don't you guys find it odd that HIV+ denialists are dying at a disproportionately higher rate than...say...anyone else?

    Denialists: Its teh drugz and stress!

    Like I said. That quote describes denialists perfectly.

    -Poodle Stomper

  10. Seth Kalichman,
    I take it you've decided to give up on both the psychologizing and the real science. You are now relying on Pubmed contests to make your points.

    Right then, stooping to your own level once more, let me ask who are you? Have you ever published any hard science on HIV, or is it all merely in the mind a far as you are concerned?

    You are suggesting that Prof. DeHarven's standards of virus isolation carry no authority today. You will now tell us which standards are the proper ones for purifying, isolating and establishing the existence of "HIV". Until you have set us right on these standards, it would be pretty silly to ask for papers that fail to confirm the existence of the Virus, wouldn't you say?

    Above I tried to demonstrate fair debate rules by quoting and linking. This paedagogical approach seems to have been unsuccessful, so let me be more direct: Chapter, verse and import of the following please:

    [Claus Koehnlein]has, however, been a liability to HIV/AIDS denialism. His statement that people treated with ARVs remain healthy is inconsistent with Duesberg’s claim that the medications are toxic. In addition, he has said that one of Duesberg’s central premises, that ARVs cause AIDS can be easily empirically tested and yet is obviously false because there are tragic numbers of children who have never taken illicit drugs and never treated with AZT who have died of AIDS"

    Since this is you main argument, can you tell us exactly has Koehnlein said, where and in which context?

    By your logic, is every HIV scientist that is not in agreement with Robert Gallo or Luc Montagnier a liability to HIVism? Or is disagreement only a liability when it comes to Duesberg and Rethinkers?

    In the hypothetical event Montagnier were to show that there is no cell killing in "HIV" culture in the presence of certain antibiotics would he be a liability to himself? If I could find a statement from Montagnier to the effect that HIV requires "cofactors" to kill, would that be a liability? If I could quote Robert Gallo saying Kaposi's Sarcoma is not caused by "HIV" would that be a liability? If I could produce peer-reviewed papers showing that qualified physicians are unable to determine clinically who has AIDS and who doesn't, would that be a liability? If I could produce a large ten-year study of serodiscordant couples with no sero-conversions after study entry, would that be a liability? If I could quote
    "HIV experts" at you, saying that "purified
    HIV" is basically cell debris, and that more
    "realistic" research material is needed, would that be a liability? Various scientists complaining that it's impossible to validate new "HIV" tests because there is no gold standard to validate them against, would that qualify as a liability?

    Please inform us of your standards, Dr. Kalichman, and I will be happy to educate you.

    In the meantime here's a a lesson in basic logic, necessary to even have a discussion:

    A causes some B therefore A causes all B.

    Is this a valid inference, Dr. Kalichman? Once you've worked out the answer, apply it to this "obvious" inference of yours:

    "that ARVs cause AIDS can be easily empirically tested and yet is obviously false because there are tragic numbers of children who have never taken illicit drugs and never treated with AZT who have died of AIDS."

    If you still feel like advancing your argument, we can continue by examining its factual basis.

    Best regards

    Ruairidh MacDonald (not Alfred. What's up with the name game; an HIVist compulsion perhaps?)

  11. I am a jew, and I am gay, and I am someone who has investigated hiv and aids intensely for 10 years and I too find HIV to be a bucketofbull. I too am what "Dr" Kalichman calls a "denialist".

    You say both aids dissent and holocaust denial are equivalent? You say "both are irrational since there is such overwhelming evidence"

    As I said, I HAVE investigated this more than full time for 10 years, and I find the overwhelming evidence to be on the side of those that you and Kalichman are derogatorily labeling and equating to holocaust denialists.

    As a gay man and as a Jew, I now fully expect you, dear Ema Nekaf, to fully explain to me why the exact years of high deaths that are said to be due to hiv are the EXACT SAME YEARS that high dosage AZT monotherapy was given to everyone who tests HIV positive.

    And then, I expect YOU to explain to me why we gays are prodded, poked and scared into taking hiv tests that are fully well proven to show positive for 70 different factors that have nothing to do with hiv:

    And then, I fully expect you to explain to me why we gays are told that these tests that can blow for 70 factors are 99.9% accurate.

    Then please explain to me why the ONLY culturing of supposed hiv retrovirus that was ever done was done only in cord blood, when it has been known since 1979 that cord blood harbors many HERV's.

    Yes, indeed. It is well known, since the late 1970’s (Sandra Panem’s work, in Current Top Pathol, 1979, 66 :175-189), that the normal human placenta contains loads of C type retroviruses (HERVs). Placental lymphocytes are, therefore, likely to contain the same HERVs that, when placed under stimulating culture conditions, may bud from cell surfaces and form complete retroviral particles (C-type) recognizable with the electron microscope (Fig. 2). Yet Gallo, Montagnier, Barre-Sinoussi et al. avoided to explain why their experiments apparently wouldn’t work with lymphocytes from the peripheral blood, instead of those from cord blood.

    It is also well known that HIV researchers use the protein p24, that is also well known to be associated with Golgi apparatus in cells, as well as p24 is also associated with yeasts, but hiv researchers have ignored this for 20 years and so p24 is still being used as a supposed lab marker when they "verify" for infection said to be due to hiv, yet this infection by a retrovirus is not ever backed by any such EM evidences of infection.

    Then please explain to me why here in the US, liver failure, in those who take the aids drugs, has been the leading cause of death in American hiv positives since 1995 when azt monotherapy ended.

    And then please do explain to me why your little itty bitty Jewish feelings are so hurt by those who deny the jewish holocaust but refuse to see how the very same holocaust launched upon primarily gays, drug users, inner city blacks, and the blacks in Africa is being sponsored by you and those you support while you call those who fight to expose the holocaust as "denialists".

    It is You, my dear jewish Cain-like brother, who is supporting a holocaust against me, your gay jewish brother.

    God said to Cain, and I now say to you and all who support HIV AIDS and the aids drugs, and to all who ignore the real causes of death in these disparaged and marginalized people:
    "What have you done?!" Your brothers blood cries out for justice! Do you think I will be lenient?

    Perhaps you too Ema should at least pretend to investigate the subject you are addressing before opening your own holocaust denying mouth.

  12. Thanks for this thread, Seth.

    Looks like we’ve got our 9 by 9 AIDS Denialist Bingo™ card.

    71. Nature and Science and the New York Times censor dissident science
    72. Complicit in the genocide of gays and blacks
    73. Any Bible-thumping quote by Pastor Michael
    74. Any spelling of “fuck” with #@!%&* symbols by Jason
    75. HIV doesn't cause AIDS coz Todd called Henry a ‘kike’
    76. 70 different cross reacting factors
    77. Cord blood is full of HERVs, unlike “peripheral” blood
    79. HIV-p24 is the same as the golgi protein Comitin coz they’re both 24 kilodaltons
    80. Economic crisis on Wall Street
    81. Reference please… and no PubMed contests!

  13. @71... don't forget to add the fucking BBC to that list... ; )

  14. Call it the "f#@king BBC" and get two (71 and 74) for the price of one.

  15. BSE and others... Snout’s list could use some explaining. Snout had summed up AIDS denial in a list of 36 pearls of wisdom. The list was expanded by Poodle Stomper. Snout was impressed, but not pleased because he has a high need for symmetry and wants the list to fit the form of a Bingo Card. I can understand that. Hence, Snout brings the list to a nice 9 x 9 matrix (81 pearls). The rest are found in the comments to “The Christine Maggiore Story: Final Chapter” just a couple down after this post. It is worth a look. Could be the most clever thing since inventing David Crowe.

  16. A further benefit of the AIDS Denialist Bingo™ numbering system is that it can also be used by AIDS denialists to save themselves time and valuable bandwidth. Instead of laboriously typing their canards out by hand, they could simply semi-automate their posts by keying in the relevant numbers. For example, this thread could be much shorter if it read:

    Anonymous said: 74

    Anonymous said: 71, 67, 72

    Michael Geiger said: 67

    Anonymous said: 73, 56

    Jason said: 75, 74

    Michael said: 80

    Ruairidh MacDonald said: 81, 6, 70, 81 again, 26, 20, 69,

    Michael said: 52, 53, 54, 76, 77, 79, 72, 73

    Snout said: Bingo!

  17. Hi Seth.

    For the convenience of your readers and their denialist-surfing pleasure I have posted a complete (but preliminary) list of the 81 Canards for playing AIDS Denialist Bingo™ all in the one convenient post. You can find it on:

    Your readers might also be interested in a new scholarly review of the innovative epidemiological insights of Emeritus Professor Henry H. Bauer:

  18. Thanks Snout. Denialist Bingo is a huge contribution.

  19. As we say in Texas......YEEE F'in HAW!!!!!
    I made it on the Denialist Bingo List!!
    Hey Maw, look it's me at #75!!!
    Aw, she's so am I!!!
    J. Todd DeShong

  20. Snout,
    I want to suggest The Denialism Drinking Game (copyright Poodles). It isn't for the faint of heart...or liver, though. Anytime a denialist quotes some long refuted misunderstanding from a denialist site we take a shot. If they do so but don't even understand what their quote means, we take two....ect... I'm open to more rules but either way I figure we'll all be plastered by the end of the first paragraph!

    -Poodle Stomper

  21. "And if you pay attention to Henry Bauer, you will hear that homosexuality is a mental illness and that the Loch Ness Monster lives." -Seth


    About Nessie: he talks about the probability of something living there that we don't yet know about. Unlike you he personally avoids calling it a "monster"

  22. Dear Snout,

    In your long winded diatribe describing who the deniers are, you left out the common folk who see right through the diabolical trappings of your overly protected, heavily funded death and dying club. They grow in numbers day by day. Jesus... you and the good old boy Dr. Kalichman make it seem there's there's just a handful. You both severely underestimate.

    In the meantime answer for the casual reader who stumbles on to your blog: Why is it that people on treatment with anti-HIV medicine are dying from the side effects of these drugs more often than from illnesses associated with AIDS? (Reisler et al - Grade 4 events)

    Brian Carter

  23. Brian, I don’t want to give the casual reader the impression that I consider your ignorant trolling with anything other than the utmost contempt, but have you actually read Reisler et al?

    On second thoughts, given your level of reading comprehension perhaps it might be better if you stuck to AIDS Myth Exposed and You-tube.

    If you had bothered to read the study you are lying about, you would realize that grade 4 events are relatively as common as AIDS defining events in people taking HAART because AIDS defining events have become numerically much less common with effective antiretroviral treatment. The overall risk of lethally serious events (whether AIDS defining or Grade 4) has plummeted for people taking HAART.

    You would also have noticed that Reisler et al make no such assertion that Grade 4 event deaths are, as you put it, “dying from the side effects of these drugs” In fact, as they make clear:

    However, the cause of many serious or life-threatening events is multifactorial and clear attribution to the use of HAART, specific ARV drugs, HIV infection, or other factors is frequently not possible. Potential risk factors for the development of life-threatening clinical events among HIV-infected individuals on HAART include HIV virus-host interactions, stage of HIV disease, ARV drugs, genetic predisposition, age, comorbid conditions, coinfections (e.g., hepatitis B or hepatitis C), concomitant medications, nutritional status, recreational drugs and alcohol, other social behaviors and practices, and physician experience.

    No doubt you will dismiss this as Reisler et al being in the pocket of Big Pharma and teh AID$ cash cow, like you did when Padian and Rodriguez took exception to you lying about their work. All a big conspiracy, Brian, isn't it?

    Next time, Brian, how about actually reading the study before you misrepresent it? Or maybe get someone else to read it to you? Or perhaps wait until Dr Reisler and colleagues release the You-tube version?

  24. Brian
    I think Snout is on to your core problems. You know, cognitive distortions, perceptual rigidity, inappropriate affect. It is really sad.
    To better conceal your mental health problems you really should stay away from webcams. Your YouTube videos are more than revealing. As a concerned fellow Human Being, do yourself a favor, stick with blogging.

  25. OK,
    Let me in on the Brian Bashing! NAW, it's too easy, and from the first grade level questions he has asked me, I also feel a little sorry for him.
    HOWEVER, I would love to laugh at his YOUTUBE videos. I have searched using "Brian Carter" but no luck. GIMME, GIMME, GIMME the Golden Words so that I too might enjoy the bounty that is The Brian Carter Show!

  26. When I saw one of Brians videos I thought he was recovering from a stroke... but nope its a plain old case of stupid.

  27. Photonaut has left a new comment on your post "Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, ...":

    Seth me lad!

    Keep up the good work. You are Aid$'s worst enemy.

    My comment:

    Dr Bauer

    This is so fraught with irony - he amateurly projects his own perceived stereotype of the “babe in the woods”, naive, gullible “young person” “at risk” from “denialist ideas”. Yet Seth Kalichman exposes that he is just one such: one of the numberless nincompoops who have never had an original thought in their lives, yet are adept at rehashing & spewing out what their tutors like to hear - & so they go on themselves to become “professors” (professional sophists), leading a new generation of the blind into the future.


  28. MacDonald Said,

    Hey Newton

    keep doubling up on ‘em ??s That’s like u know reely gonnu fool da stoopid denialists, heheh!!

  29. Diverted from Denying AIDS Post
    Anonymous, (why do you post as such?)"

    Because I do not write my name and number on the walls of public toilets. Seth has my IP if you really care.

    I think you are banned from posting at Bauers because you called him "that Jew, that kike". It may not make sense to you but it does to me. (now you know who I am)

    I know snout's blog and he is Infinitesimally more articulate and self controlled than you will ever be. Give up blogging; you only hurt HIV/AIDS

    "I may be forced to create a new site called correctingfarber!"

    Go for it; nobody cares what you write because it is so full of hate and self-loathing.

    "Not sure if you were able to see the review of Denying AIDS that someone I never heard of posted; Claus, or Klaus, or Heinz, not sure."

    You read it but can't remember if his name is Claus, Klaus or Heinz? Stop pretending that you are not paying attention, it reflects badly on your qualifications as a psychologist, as a "listener". But if that is the case then you really haven't "infiltrated" the "denialists" much. I am an reader I and have heard of him.

    "The more they say the more people can see how unstable they are."

    I wouldn't bet on it

  30. Funny, I never called Bauer a Kike and he did not post my comments either. I did ask him whether he had ever heard of sexual network and how networks figure into his accounting for AIDS. A simple concept that refutes 70% of what the idiot is saying about how HIV is represented in populations. A simple concept that he has no clue about. Why anyone would give Henry Bauer any serious consideration speaks volumes of how desperate denialists are for anything to reinforce their denial. Bauer should go back to Loch Ness or Area 51 where he at least has some expertise. This is so sad.

  31. Gee Anonymous, I hope you would not write your own name and # on walls of public toilets! A good ho' leaves that up to their Johns! And from what I have read about you in such venues, is that you ain't a bad ho! It's good to have a career!

  32. Re-Posted here from JTD's Breaking Bauer blog
    Were you so embarrassed about your first anti-semitic blog entries that you had to go out and recreate your blog persona from scratch?
    PS: You know why my entries on Seth's blog pass moderation?
    I don't call him a fat fucker like you call Bauer "that Jew, that Kike".
    PPS: Seth and Maggiore have something in common: they create fake personas for the sake personas; Bauer doesn't.
    PPPS: yes, it's me PAT!

  33. "Hello, paging Joseph Newton, paging Joseph Newton, paging Joseph Newton --Newton, can you hear me, over, paging Joseph Newton....

    So, tell me Professor Kalichman, what kind of a grown man, let alone a Professor at the esteemed University of Connecticut, lies about his name to get into scientific conferences and corresponds with other Professors under false pretenses?

    Does the Dean of your school know about this? Your publisher? Paging Joseph Newton, come in Newton."


  34. "PPS: Seth and Maggiore have something in common: they create fake personas for the sake personas; Bauer doesn't."

    Paging Josef Martin, paging Josef Martin...

  35. To: Various Psychology Department Senior Faculty at UConn (umm, not UOC)
    FROM: Michael Geiger, HEAL
    cc: Crowe, Bauer, Duesberg, Farber, Rethinking AIDS Board.

    Sirs and Madams,

    I would like to bring to your attention, as heads and overseers of the UOC Department of Psychology, the currently unfolding situation of what seems to be a rather unscrupulous Professor, namely a Dr. Seth Kalichman, employed as a professor in your Department.

    It would seem that Dr. Kalichman has taken it upon himself to expose, or perhaps to "save the world", from those he has derogatorily labeled as AIDS "denialists", his favored terminology for those who question or doubt any of the current consensus of works regarding hiv research, medicine, and accepted science.

    Among these so-called "denialists", by the way, are many people who spent often up to 20 years researching the issues, and includes such notable persons as government officials, Heads of State, National Academy of Science members, Nobel Laureates, scientists, esteemed researchers, medical doctors, former university deans, various professors, media journalists, and a great number of hiv positives themselves, among lots of others. Some of them are also members of the organization "Rethinking AIDS", and a list of several thousand of them from around the world can be found at the following link from the Rethinking Aids website:

    Most all of the doubters are fully open to openly discussing the issues and their views and research, and would welcome such. Most would welcome being queried and would greatly appreciate if their works could be more widely known to exist, as there often seems to be a vast amount of effort in keeping these dissident viewpoints out of public view, and the public and in particular those who are so diagnosed deserve to hear all sides of the issues, and deserve to be fully informed of any controversies, in that they themselves may make fully informed treatment decisions.

    Certainly, if any of you, or if any members of your own families were to have been diagnosed as having a deadly disease, undoubtedly you would, as a rational human being, certainly agree that you would want to be fully informed, and hear all sides of any issues regarding the science of your diagnosis, and/or its treatments, in particular if those treatments meant lifelong "FDA Black Label" chemotherapies or other highly toxic and often deadly treatments that had been passed via FAST TRACK studies. After all, FDA black labeled drugs are those with the most severe of side effects.

    As I am sure you are all undoubtedly aware of, Professor Kalichman has recently written a book on the subject called Denying Aids. This Us versus Them exposition, breaking the camps into the "us" who are right, versus the "them" who are wrongheaded "denialists", supposedly exposes the "psychologys" of all of these scientists, doctors, and laymen who doubt several aspects of the hiv-aids science and/or connections or treatments.

    While all this effort of Dr. Kalichman may be considered as "valiant" by those who are unaware of or have not investigated nor researched the issues, allow me to point out that Dr. Kalichman, contrary to established and accepted principles of psychology, had been very deceitfully representing himself in his many emails sent out under a false name, as "Joe C. Newton", and coming from a computer at the UOC, wherein he represented himself in these communications variously as a grad student, a medical caregiver, as an hiv positive, as a concerned friend of hiv positives, as another HIV doubter, and various other misrepresentations, all the while enticing some of the doubters into writing something that may have been looked upon in poor taste or worse, such as attempting to find someone among the doubters, who would encourage so-called "unsafe sex, or sex without condoms. (yet none who Kalichman contacted ever promoted or agreed to any such behaviors in any emails).

    Kalichman's emails, sent under a false name, did however raise red flags with many of the doubters, who then began to compare notes and emails from "Joe C. Newton" at UOC.

    Upon further investigation, it also seems that a grad student of Kalichman, a student of Kalichmans'. a Ms. Lisa Eaton, who has co-authored papers with Kalichman, may also have been involved in Professor Kalichman's subterfuge.

    I also happen to note that according to UOC online descriptions, both Kalichman and Eaton are co-authors of hiv related psych papers, and Kalichman is a longtime recipient of research funding for hiv/aids issues. Perhaps this quite obviously explains their sense of protectionism for their works and finances derived from hiv issues and its beliefs?

    At any rate, the exposure of Seth Kalichman's deceitful behaviors while investigating his book, are currently being chronicled in a continuing series of posts on the hiv and aids information blog site of Dean Emeritus of Arts & Sciences at Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Dr. Henry H. Bauer, who is also the author of a recent book "The Origins, Persistance, and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory".

    Dr. Bauer's blog on HIV?AIDS can be found at the following link:

    While Kalichman (or Kalichman/Eaton) found no such evidences while falsely pretending to be other than who and what he is, the fact remains that he has broken several of the “ETHICAL PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGISTS AND CODE OF CONDUCT”, drawn up and published by the American Psychological Association.

    By the way, I would like to clearly point out that at no time whatsoever did Mr. Kalichman simply directly seek to communicate with anyone! All of the doubters are quite open to carefully explaining what they believe and why they believe it with all who simply ask them! However, no such courtesy had ever been given by Professor Seth Kalichman, who quite obviously, seems to have preferred to take an adversarial role regarding the issues of varying beliefs about hiv and aids causation.

    Therefore, I, for one among many who have spent years investigating hiv/aids issues, would like to know if any of you, as heads of the psychology department, had been aware of, or had any of you condoned or given approval for Professor Seth Kalichman's deceptions, frauds, subterfuges, and misrepresentations, conducted by him while contacting hiv doubters for his investigations of issues relating to his book, "Denying AIDS"?

    Sincerely Yours,

    Michael Geiger
    HEAL (Health Education Aids Liason)
    San Diego


    The Code Of Conduct states, for example (emphases added):
    “Principle C: Integrity
    Psychologists seek to promote accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness in the science, teaching, and practice of psychology. In these activities psychologists do not steal, cheat, or engage in fraud, subterfuge, or intentional misrepresentation of fact….

    8.07 Deception in Research
    (a) Psychologists do not conduct a study involving deception unless they have determined that the use of deceptive techniques is justified by the study’s significant prospective scientific, educational, or applied value and that effective nondeceptive alternative procedures are not feasible.
    (b) Psychologists do not deceive prospective participants about research that is reasonably expected to cause physical pain or severe emotional distress.
    (c) Psychologists explain any deception that is an integral feature of the design and conduct of an experiment to participants as early as is feasible, preferably at the conclusion of their participation, but no later than at the conclusion of the data collection, and permit participants to withdraw their data.”

    Where a study would not be feasible without deception, the researcher is required to obtain approval for the research from the Human Subjects Committee or Institutional Review Board at his university or other place of employment. For example, the psychology profession’s Wiki states:
    “Human subjects committees or Institutional Review Boards, which include researchers and lawyers that review and approve research at an institution must approve the use of deception to certify that it is both necessary and that a plan exists to debrief participants to remove and residual effects of the deception.

  36. You are so incredibly unstable it's alarming!!!

    "many people who spent often up to 20 years researching the issues" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH......thanks for researching you mean making things up, right?

    "both Kalichman and Eaton are co-authors of hiv related psych papers, and Kalichman is a longtime recipient of research funding for hiv/aids issues"
    ....well aren't you quite the sleuth!!!! I mean, clearly the Dean would NOT be aware of peer reviewed publications (some thing you probably haven't heard of but it's when credible people review your work) or the of external grant funding (you're right, deans usually don't pay attention to money filtering into their I'm sure he feels indebted to you)

    Bauer's link seems to be broken...were you referring to the Nessie one (my personal favorite...Nessie is just so cute!), the alien one (pretty scary stuff) or the one that highlights his unsuccessful career (here's a tip, if you want to know whether or not someone is esteemed in their a pub med search on their name....BUT I'll save you the suspense...odd as it may be, Bauer HAS NOT published ANYTHING in 30 years.)

    And finally, those HIV positive, but not HIV positive (I can't keep your craziness straight) people you were referring to....was that Scott Zanetti, Jody Wells, Huw Christie Williams, David Pasquarelli, Marietta Ndziba, Peter Mokaba, Raphael Lombardo, Ken Anderlini, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti, Michael Bellefountaine, Sophie Brassard, Ronnie Burk, Sylvie Cousseau, AND/OR Christine Maggiore? Honestly, what is it going to take for you to WAKE UP? (please don't actually answer that or write me back because I DO NOT care to correspond with you.)

  37. Lemme get this straight, Michael.

    Are you claiming that using a pseudonym on the internet, or for a published work, or for an email exchange is unethical?

    Man you just won the 2009 award for combining stupidity and hypocrisy in the one retarded concept.

    Use of pseudonyms in all these situations is common practice, although some people prefer to use names on their birth certificate. Henry Bauer has at least one pseudonymously published work. Who cares?

    You yourself have an extremely well-established reputation for posting on the internet under multiple identities. This only gets irritating when you do so to create the illusion that there are multiple individuals supporting your views In internet speak, this is called "sock puppeting".

    I'm stunned that you would try to present being pseudonymous on the net as somehow reprehensible.

    There are a whole lot of reasons people adopt pseudonyms on the net and elsewhere. Some are extremely sensible and prudent, and others have a more lighthearted rationale. Sometimes it's a mixture of the two. Get over it, and try dealing with the content of what people are saying, rather than who it may or may not be thae actual person saying it.

    For you and Henry to attack people for using pseudonyms is not only deeply stupid, it's also profoundly hypocritical.

    Everyone knows why you and Henry are attacking the pseudonymnity of your critics - it's because it's a distraction from the substance of your moronic arguments.

  38. The problem with the type of group think mentality that is involved with HIV Denialism and other fringe lunacies is that they don't realise how completely nuts they sound to the vast majority of the world.

    The letter writing campaign to Science asking them to retract Gallo's 1984 papers is a good example.

    In Michael's case it is a double fail as the people he is addressing this catalog of delusions to are psychologists.

    My guess is that when they conclude that Michael is stark raving bonkers he will then diagnose all of them as self-loathing closeted gay homophobes.

  39. [Lisa relies to Michael Geiger]

    You are so incredibly unstable it's alarming!!!

    "many people who spent often up to 20 years researching the issues" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH......thanks for researching you mean making things up, right?

    "both Kalichman and Eaton are co-authors of hiv related psych papers, and Kalichman is a longtime recipient of research funding for hiv/aids issues"
    ....well aren't you quite the sleuth!!!! I mean, clearly the Dean would NOT be aware of peer reviewed publications (some thing you probably haven't heard of but it's when credible people review your work) or the of external grant funding (you're right, deans usually don't pay attention to money filtering into their I'm sure he feels indebted to you)

    Bauer's link seems to be broken...were you referring to the Nessie one (my personal favorite...Nessie is just so cute!), the alien one (pretty scary stuff) or the one that highlights his unsuccessful career (here's a tip, if you want to know whether or not someone is esteemed in their a pub med search on their name....BUT I'll save you the suspense...odd as it may be, Bauer HAS NOT published ANYTHING in 30 years.)

    And finally, those HIV positive, but not HIV positive (I can't keep your craziness straight) people you were referring to....was that Scott Zanetti, Jody Wells, Huw Christie Williams, David Pasquarelli, Marietta Ndziba, Peter Mokaba, Raphael Lombardo, Ken Anderlini, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti, Michael Bellefountaine, Sophie Brassard, Ronnie Burk, Sylvie Cousseau, AND/OR Christine Maggiore? Honestly, what is it going to take for you to WAKE UP? (please don't actually answer that or write me back because I DO NOT care to correspond with you.)

  40. [Michael Geiger replies to Lisa. WARNING - read a little at a time to avoid laughing out of control. You may want to detox with some green tea and coffee enema after reading]

    Please calm down, Lisa, before you make yourself ill from stress. Furthermore, your letter exudes the very instability that it accuses me of.

    Of course you want me to write back, or you would not have written to me. If for no other reason, to express your own anger; being the same reason I sent my own email yesterday.

    It is healthy to express ones inner anger and we can harm our emotional and physical health by not doing so.

    FYI, As a gay man, who has been "out" in the gay communities of California since before the word "aids" meant anything but a teachers assistant, I have witnessed this close up and personally since the beginning, including with my own lovers and close friends.

    I watched as gay men came out of their proverbial closets in the early 80's, and came out to such societal hatred as you yourself have fortunately never known. I watched as most of the gay community became caught up in extreme drug, alcohol, or sex addictions followed by massive use of antibiotics to treat chronic std re-infections. I have seen who has suffered from extreme depression, stress, loneliness, hopelessness, or self hatred. I have seen how these factors, and mostly the emotional/psychological factors, intensely and negatively impacted their health and their lives.

    I have seen who gets ill, and who remains healthy. And I myself have researched hiv/aids issues and science for more than 20 years. My opinions and beliefs were formed slowly and rationally. For several years, I too believed that it was all about HIV. However, before I ever heard the name of Peter Duesberg or any of the other so called "denialists", I had already become one myself. What I noticed early on, was the extreme stress of self abuse in many members of the gay community, particularly those who became ill.

    As my primary interest in gays was actually psychology, formed from an interest to understand my own sexuality, very early on, I found common and extreme psychological factors affecting those who actually became ill, and I found other common psych factors in those who remained well. I noticed those who had been disowned by their families or were the most self loathing for being gay were commonly the most self destructive via drug and alcohol abuse and were the first to suffer devastating illnesses and early death. I noticed that those most susceptible to intense fear, panic, and paranoia were the second to suffer actual illness. I noticed intense stress, often from the diagnosis itself, and often from losing someone close to you, was creating common connections of intense depression and hopelessness that in itself was feeding the breakdown of physical health and spreading.

    In the 1980's/90's, there was nothing more intensely experienced or internalized than the death sentence of an hiv diagnosis. Those receiving such often had to be carried home, as they simply collapsed from the emotional impact of the diagnosis itself. Stress, stress, and more stress. Internalized never ending kinds of stress. But what does this have to do with physical health and the immune system?

    In research, I found the clear connections to stress, the thymus gland, and the suppression of T-cells.

    Google "STRESS" and "THYMUS".

    You will find paper after paper on this clear connection. You will find that the thymus is where your CD4 T-cells are born and released into the bloodstream. You will find it is the center of your immune system. You will find that stress causes it to shut down and even shrink by as much as 50% in as little as 24 hours, directly due to stress. Stress shuts down the immune system. And combined with other physical stressors including poor nutrition (common among those abusing drugs) or toxic drinking water, or the extreme and acute fear and panic type of stress of an hiv or aids diagnosis, can often shut down the immune systems and turn off T-cell production.

    Stress shuts down the thymus. Stress causes AIDS. In every case of actual physical illness of AIDS, you will find obvious and non-obvious high stressors. Some are subconscious such as hopelessness or self loathing or depression. But they are found to be extreme in every single case of aids immune suppression. Stress =equals=AIDS.

    And after more than 20 years of my own intense research done to save my own and my dearest loved one's and closest friends lives, as well as in efforts to save my gay community from self destruction, I stand by this more firmly than ever, though you are welcome to believe as you will.

    The lack of rational thinking on the part of so many scientists and medical care givers has been astounding, even those in the field of psychology, who might do well to look at their own psychology and emotional instabilities first.

    As for your list of dissidents who passed, I thought you were a psychologist, and did not know you are a virologist or etiologist, as you seem to be rather sure of your bioscience beliefs regarding hiv.

    What do YOU know of what they were going through emotionally or of any other details or intense stressors of their lives?

    Nothing. Nothing at all. While I know much about many of them, and the reasons and contributing intense stressors for their deaths were often quite obvious. Some, in their battle to save their friends, became extremely emotionally ill and then physically ill. Some suffered extreme depression after realizing that their efforts were rewarded with being despised by their gay community.

    Those who relentlessly attacked Christine Maggiore on blogs, media, tv, and via death threats by phone and email, as well as her battle with the coroner, as well as the stress and grief of losing her daughter and putting her husband through all of this, finally took a toll on her health and life. Any who contributed to this public and private attack on her, including your beloved Seth, fully contributed as well.

    How much could you own mother take of being publicly accused of murdering her child and fighting in a court battle? How much could your own mother take of trying to waken people to the toxicities of the medications, and then suffering intense personal attacks, before she made her own sick with deadly pneumonia.

    Hiv does not cause pneumonia, nor does it cause herpes, nor is it shown to cause any disease. But it is blamed for T cell loss that is clearly due to intense stress and/or assaults on the body. Even those studying hiv positives have consistently found high stress in all of the actual cases of aids illnesses connected to hiv diagnoses.

    Meanwhile, I will do my best to forgive your ignorance on this.

    Sincerely Yours,

    Michael Geiger

  41. Michael Geiger,

    Hiv does not cause pneumonia, nor does it cause herpes, nor is it shown to cause any disease. But it is blamed for T cell loss that is clearly due to intense stress and/or assaults on the body.

    Correct, HIV itself does not cause disseminated herpes (various herpes-family viruses do that) or pneumonia. It does however lead to the loss of CD4 T-cells, which allows herpes to become disseminated herpes.

    Even those studying hiv positives have consistently found high stress in all of the actual cases of aids illnesses connected to hiv diagnoses.

    In all cases, huh? WRONG! Many people (especially in the early days) were tested as having HIV for the first time only after having already displaying AIDS symptoms (ask Seth about his friend who had exactly that happen). This is still the case in Africa.

    Take for example this studyDuring a two year period AIDS Center had a total of 132 new patients, all of whom were HIV+ and 69.8% have had first AIDS symptoms developed.

    69.8% of the new patients came in having already displayed AIDS symptoms. BEFORE they were ever told they were HIV+.

    Those who relentlessly attacked Christine Maggiore on blogs, media, tv,…fully contributed as well.

    Can you show us any evidence that supports your stress=disseminated herpes claim? I see it regurgitated all around the AME board but still no evidence. Show us another case where this happened? A large majority of people in the US have herpes infection (I believe it is 2/3 or ¾ people). Where are all the other stressed people with disseminated herpes? Maggiore may have been stressed but there have been many more with much greater stresses than her. So again I ask, any solid evidence for your stress=disseminated herpes (your speculation doesn’t count)?

    How much could you own mother take…before she made her own sick with deadly pneumonia.

    Not you are asking ridiculous questions to cover for the fact that you yourself do not have any evidence. How about instead of speculating left and right, you simply produce evidence that the stress is what killed her? Start with stress causing multiple bouts of pneumonia and disseminated herpes.

    -Poodle Stomper

  42. Mikey G wrot:
    [Michael Geiger replies to Lisa. WARNING - read a little at a time to avoid laughing out of control. You may want to detox with some green tea and coffee enema after reading]

    But wasn't it this type of detox that killed Christine Maggiore? Do you have any details on the "radical detox" and cleansing she went through just before she died?

  43. Michael Geiger,
    You are a pompous, arrogant, know-it-all. When are you going to admit that you are an extremely insecure, insufferable bore? Only a person who is as insecure as you would be on the internet 24/7 psychoanyalyzing people you do not know and have never met. Also, in most cases, as you did with me, you psychoanalyze and diagnose them the very first time you read anything by them. Again, as you did with me at As you also did with Snout. But with Snout, you were not even man enough to diagnose him directly. No, instead you diagnosed Snout on Bauer's anti-freedom of speech blog.
    Let me tell you about you, Geiger. I had the unfortunate opportunity to see a picture of you on the internet. I believe your extremely low, seial killer self-esteem comes from your less than average physical features (being kind)!
    Naw, that was just a low blow...but you see where I am coming from.
    Actually, I believe that you say every gay man is self loathing because, as you point out in your post above, all your friends from the 80's were self loathing. Well, Geiger, it's been a couple of decades plus, and most of us have overcome that mentatlity, if indeed we ever had it! So my advice is try and expand your horizons. If all your old, self loathing friends are dead, try and make some new ones. And try to find ones who have a better self worth than you and your old, dead cronies.

  44. Seth,

    How very appropriate that the Yale "aids science day" and your presentation on the evils of aids denialism was held on April fools day.

    I hope all went well for you, and I hope you brought us dissidents lots of attention.

    Oh, and one more thing. How also very appropriate that you are a professor at U-Conn (or should I more appropriately say, "You Con" as in con-artist, scammer, flim-flam).

    And just think! Should you ever leave or retire from the university of connecticut, you will be an Ex-Con! How deliciously appropriate is that?

  45. Mr. Kalichman, you don't even deserve a waste of my keystroke. What a self-absorbed moron.

  46. Dear Dr. Kalichman:
    It has come to my attention that you wish to "keep tabs on [our] denialist activities."

    While I disagree with the characterization of what we do -- supporting scientific integrity and helping consumers make informed health choices -- as "denialism," I do not object at all to your "keeping tabs" on our activities, provided it is done legally and without deceit.

    Rethinkers are very open about what we do and what we stand for. You are very welcome to check our Web site at, sign up for updates, and join our press release list to obtain that information.

    Our organizational discussions, however, are necessarily private. Even when our discussions have been leaked, it has been quite obvious that we not up to anything harmful.

    Therefore, I personally ask that you refrain from spying activities or posing as fictional persons to get AIDS rethinkers to open up to you. That would reflect very poorly on your position and the university that employs you -- which I will not hesitate to contact if I detect less honorable behaviors from you.

    If, in the course of your research, you need a statement from Rethinking AIDS, you may call or e-mail David Crowe or me, and we will set you up with the appropriate interview subjects, ready and willing to answer intelligent questions on the science or psychology of AIDS.

    I trust that this e-mail, as with all others you receive as a professional, is private among the parties designated herein (except as noted below). However, I believe that neither I nor any of my associates have said anything incriminating here or elsewhere, or acted dishonorably.

    Rethinking AIDS is seriously, passionately and conscientiously dedicated to helping others improve their health and their understanding of AIDS research. We hear daily from people who suffer needlessly from popular misconceptions, and we are determined to help them make informed decisions based on evidence. (You may quote me from this paragraph if you wish.)

    Anyone who wishes to stand "against" informed consent in health care may take their case to the public in those terms, and rethinkers will debate them just as publicly. (And you can quote me on this, too.)

    Elizabeth (Beth)
    ElyPublic Relations
    ChairpersonRethinking AIDS

  47. Liz, you don't seem to understand what "informed consent" means, which is unsurprising given that Rethinking AIDS is almost entirely uncontaminated by by actual clinicians who deal with this concept every day of their working lives. Perhaps being a "public relations" person yourself, your ignorance is understandable.

    Here's a clue: The principle of "informed consent" has nothing at all to do with your group's narcissistic demands to have the right to spread your crank DISinformation whenever and wherever you choose.

  48. Looks like you are not only a pathological liar, but a stupid one at that, Kalichman

  49. Anonymous AND Dr. Kalichman,
    Bauer is once again bashing our happy friend Mr. Newton. However, this time he has posted pictures of "Newton" with Douchebag, er, I mean, Duesberg and Trashnick, I mean, Rasnick. Yet in the pictures "Newton" looks very, very happy.
    So I wrote a comment to Bauer, which he will not post, so I posted it at in which I point out that it is OK for Brent Leung to pull one over on the Scientific Community, but not OK when "Newton" pulls one over of the pseudo-scientists. I don't have a psychology degree, but now that I see those very happy pics of "Newton" I truly believe they are sooo pissed because "Newton" is soooooo happy!!!

  50. Weather or not you agree with Duesberg and whomever you call "denialists".......there is a strange money trail involved with this health problem...and I think that, allot of scientists (researching other illnesses) are resentful that their funding has been yanked for research on this health problem.
    I do not trust the FDA or the drug companies. I hope they
    develop good drugs that help people without poisoning them. So far, drugs developed for HIV and Cancer are deadly. 50% of cancer patients will die from the treatment alone. Even the AMA has confirmed this fact....and for them to admit that is a HUGE step OUT of denial.
    I also find it odd, how angry people are over these few so called "denialists" there are only a few. There really are so many things worth being angry about like, how much the AMA affects our health care, what their motives are.....or how about, how the FDA is operating.
    Get real and get angry about something that is true and has been in front of your faces for decades. And remember to question everything, especially government.

  51. Anonymous
    You posted your comment to an old thread. I figured no one would see it. So I also posted it to the newest thread on this blog concerning Magic Johnson. You may check that thread for your replies…you have some…

  52. From an email recvd Jan 12 2010

    I wonder what possible right you think you have to go about this
    grand worldwide strategy to root out all the world's AIDS
    "denialists". Just who the hell do you think you are--God! if
    people through their own education and thought processes find huge
    gaps in the HIV=AIDS theory than so be it, it is their life and
    they have the right to live it as they see fit. I suspect you are
    nothing more than just another bitter hate-filled fag who because
    of your obesity, vapid personality, and slothful appearance could
    not get laid if your life depended on it. Get some help and stop
    using others as a tool to vent your own self-hatred and the hatred
    of your sick warped little fag subculture. It's funny how the
    people who plaster the internet with their pissy little arguments
    about HIV are you, Deshong, Poodle Stomper, and this Snout
    thing...all obviously viscous nasty ass queens with nothing better
    to do with their lives.

    Seriously, you all need to get a life and leave people alone.