tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post8268190489345028478..comments2024-02-25T14:29:44.021-05:00Comments on Denying AIDS and other oddities: Goodbye Duesberg's and Ruggiero's Articles! Did You Ever Exist?Seth Kalichmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comBlogger95125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-80488762446761376012012-08-11T21:40:59.665-04:002012-08-11T21:40:59.665-04:00my field is math so i don't understand all sci...my field is math so i don't understand all science behind hiv/aids.<br />i don't have enough knowlege/data to decide (i am too far from medicine), maybe Duesberg is totaly wrong, but he does not look insane at all (i can say that because i probably know logic and statistic much better than any of biologist).<br /><br />and all i can see at other side is total rejection of discussion. like this article and all of "ortodox" replies. this actually sounds unscientific to me.<br />scince history has _many_ examples of such behavior...<br /><br />anyway, i am still young and hiv negative, so see you in 50 years. will be funny.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-20667413388995233462010-07-21T14:16:14.098-04:002010-07-21T14:16:14.098-04:00Denying AIDS - A book by Seth Kalichman
Seth Kal...Denying AIDS - A book by Seth Kalichman <br /><br />Seth Kalichman is a better man than I. Kalichman is a clinical psychologist, editor of the journal Aids and Behavior and director of the Southeast HIV/AIDS Research and Evaluation (SHARE) product, and he has devoted his life to the treatment and prevention of HIV. Despite a clear passion for reducing the harm done by HIV/AIDS, to research this book he actually met, and interviewed, prominent HIV/AIDS denialists. I confess I simply lack the temperament to have done this. To this day, when I read about HIV/AIDS denialists, and the the 330,000 people who have died as a result of HIV/AIDS denialism, I see red. I think violent, bloody thoughts. <br /><br />The HIV/AIDS denialists, like Celia Farber, object to being called denialist, a quote from her in the book.<br /><br />Go to Amazon.com to get a book about Denying AIDSAids Reseachhttp://www.howtowritetermpapers.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-37113938358423211502010-04-14T09:46:23.545-04:002010-04-14T09:46:23.545-04:00Let's see, the majority here seem to not like ...Let's see, the majority here seem to not like to research new ideas ( unless they are well funded and politically correct). So that may be why we get little wothwhile research done for our tax dollars. I bet the majority here make their living toeing a pretty narrow line. You better get back to the lab, your side is losing on the science front - blogging will hold the fort$$ for awhile but get ready for a new gig in a few short years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-67500811057748827272009-12-08T02:29:15.199-05:002009-12-08T02:29:15.199-05:00All's bullshit.For most of you here, HIV/AIDS ...All's bullshit.For most of you here, HIV/AIDS is like religion. You must take it otherwise you're cursed forever. There is no way to see further than "authorities" say and (of course) they have patented license for the "only truth".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-54218690097760257652009-11-24T07:52:10.198-05:002009-11-24T07:52:10.198-05:00Thanks for commenting arv13
I honestly do believe...Thanks for commenting arv13<br /><br />I honestly do believe that Peter Duesberg is not a scientist, although he probably once was. But for the past 10 to 15 years he has engaged in behavior that no ethical scientist would accept. He refutes evidence by cherry picking research results. He makes claims in areas, such as clinical medicine and infectious diseases,where he has no expertise. He has repeatedly raised questions about established fact without offering any evidence to the contrary. I could go on. <br /><br />Peter Duesberg is not a dissident scientist. He is a denialist because he is not offering viable alternative views and is not conducting research to support or disqualify his proposals. <br /><br />It should also be clear that his funding was never withdrawn. His grants ended. He was unsuccessful in getting new funding because his ideas could not compete. His proposal to the NIH to do poppers research was out of date on arrival. While aneuploidy is obviously important in cancer, no one will take seriously the idea that ALL cancers are CAUSED by chromosomal anomalies. It is not that others are being funded to do what Duesberg suggests. They are just bad ideas.<br /><br />And of course there is no rational purpose to any of this. Duesberg is impaired. His own worst enemy.<br /><br />Now having said all of that, I can tell you he is a charismatic, likable, engaging man. I would prefer to spend time with him over most of the dry and boring scientists I have met. I certainly can see why people would 'take up his cause'. <br /><br />The comments on my blog do become mean-spirited and surely can come off as bitter. I think much of this is out of frustration. Most people involved in AIDS just ignore AIDS Denialists. But for those of us who have engaged them it is with great frustration. I believe that Duesberg, Rasnick, Bauer and their followers have the potential to do great harm to the most vulnerable persons affected by AIDS. The Internet is their sandbox and if we do not call them out for what they are doing their tactics for persuading people to ignore HIV test results, avoid treatment, and all the rest will go unchallenged.<br /><br />Thank you again for reading my blog and thank you for taking the time to comment.Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-4350046091684059982009-11-24T01:25:02.268-05:002009-11-24T01:25:02.268-05:00It's not clear to me why everyone here needs t...It's not clear to me why everyone here needs to discredit other scientists in order to make their view or point more valid ... ?<br /><br />Do you honestly think Duesberg (and others) is not a "real" scientist? Do people here truly believe that a scientist at a major research university would make up all this knowing that all his funding would be withdrawn? If so, for what purpose? <br /><br />Clearly, the comments here are mean-spirited, arrogant, and somewhat bitter.<br /><br />-arv13@hotmail.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-6090217617598496052009-08-21T23:56:56.743-04:002009-08-21T23:56:56.743-04:00No surprises in the hypocrisies of AIDS Denialism....No surprises in the hypocrisies of AIDS Denialism. See the same exact thing in Holocaust Denial and all other deniers. This is a single form of psychopathology with symptoms expressed toward multiple targets. Any description of one denialism group can be word substituted for another group, such as holocaust and AIDS.Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-60839630143345406622009-08-20T00:52:19.435-04:002009-08-20T00:52:19.435-04:00John, if you look more closely at the ructions amo...<b>John, if you look more closely at the ructions among the AIDS denialists it is not so much about whether HIV exists or not, but whether they reckon they can get away with publicly claiming that it doesn't exist.</b><br /><br />Which shows them to be complete and utter hypocrites when they attempt to claim the moral high ground and portray themselves as defenders of science. <br /><br />Denialism is all about politics and not science.Chris Noblenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-7969583953600742092009-08-19T10:12:22.844-04:002009-08-19T10:12:22.844-04:00http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19619953
Med H...http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19619953<br /><br />Med Hypotheses. 2009 Jul 19. [Epub ahead of print]<br /><br />WITHDRAWN: HIV-AIDS hypothesis out of touch with South African AIDS - A new perspective.<br /><br />Duesberg PH, Nicholson JM, Rasnick D, Fiala C, Bauer HH.<br />Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Donner Laboratory, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.<br /><br />This Article-in-Press has been withdrawn pending the results of an investigation. The editorial policy of Medical Hypotheses makes it clear that the journal considers "radical, speculative, and non-mainstream scientific ideas", and articles will only be acceptable if they are "coherent and clearly expressed." However, we have received serious expressions of concern about the quality of this article, which contains highly controversial opinions about the causes of AIDS, opinions that could potentially be damaging to global public health. Concern has also been expressed that the article contains potentially libelous material. Given these important signals of concern, we judge it correct to investigate the circumstances in which this article came to be published online. When the investigation and review have been completed we will issue a further statement. Until that time, the article has been removed from all Elsevier databases. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-29130703272268738892009-08-17T00:50:07.516-04:002009-08-17T00:50:07.516-04:00Hank, the reason scenario 1 is judged more harshly...Hank, the reason scenario 1 is judged more harshly is that it happened. Scenario 2 didn't. Resources were not diverted from more pressing causes -- malaria funding was increased simultaneously and the combination of PEPFAR and the Global Fund has produced the largest ever increase in funding for TB treatment and prevention in Africa.<br />It is also debatable if there is a more pressing cause than HIV/AIDS in Sub-Sarahan Africa, even more so in 2004. <br />I can't believe I'm discussing health policy with you. You have no place in this debate. I'd sooner ask a Klansman for his advice on race relations in the US.<br />Fulano de TalAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-40092540439749569962009-08-16T21:54:13.076-04:002009-08-16T21:54:13.076-04:00Snout
I always find it annoying when Deniers like ...Snout<br />I always find it annoying when Deniers like Hank/Bauer, Culshaw, Crowe etc. go on and on about AIDS in Africa. These are people who I bet cannot name 4 cities in South Africa, U doubt they can name countries that boarder South Africa. Can they even locate South Africa on a map? Has any of them ever stepped foot on the African Continent?<br /><br />Duesberg went for the 2000 panel. Did he visit a clinic? A township? <br /><br />Lucifer Rasnick worked for Rath and lived in South Africa for a year conducting illegal vitamin ‘trials’. Tells us a lot about Rasnick. <br /><br />There is no evidence that any of these AIDS Deniers care for Africa any more than they can about African Americans and Gay men.<br /><br />As for the unity of AIDS Deniers, there are few things going on…<br />The House of Numbers thing has gotten the Deniers feeling there is life after Maggiore. Nothing like a movie to bring people together. <br /><br />Perhaps most important is the RA conference. They would like the conference to be unified and well attended. Duesberg’s Aneuploidy meeting was pretty poorly attended. I am not so sure they broke even on that. They will need as many deniers as they can get to keep it from being a bust. Given that the venue is a dive and we are talking Oakland they cannot afford to turn anyone away. Hell, they even say I am welcome!Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-72427927885804477192009-08-16T21:26:42.840-04:002009-08-16T21:26:42.840-04:00No, Hank, I think it is you that is missing the po...No, Hank, I think it is you that is missing the point.<br /><br />Duesberg is not arguing that the SA government and and Western donors could get more bang for their buck/rand by spending it on non-HIV related projects rather than HIV prevention and treatment programs. <br /><br />That could be a perfectly reasonable proposition, provided it could be supported by sound analysis of the kind that Chigwedere et al were doing.<br /><br />Duesberg is claiming that HIV is not the cause of AIDS and that ARVs are of no benefit whatsoever, not comparing two alternative ways of using resources.<br /><br />He is like a broken record. His views have nothing to do with science or rational health policy, but with his own personal psychopathology. <br /><br />John, if you look more closely at the ructions among the AIDS denialists it is not so much about whether HIV exists or not, but whether they reckon <i>they can get away with publicly claiming</i> that it doesn't exist.<br /><br />Many of Duesberg's supporters (like Crowe and several others on the RA board who've rallied together for a show of unity) deny the existence of HIV, but think that saying so outright would scare the horses and undermine the credibility of their propaganda campaign. It's a perfect demonstration of how vacuous and corrupt HIV/AIDS denialism is, and makes it crystal clear that denialism has nothing to do with scientific integrity, but is rather about ideology and power.Snoutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-88900153010832101422009-08-16T13:08:05.333-04:002009-08-16T13:08:05.333-04:00John
I am surprised that Duesberg is not honoring...John<br /><br />I am surprised that Duesberg is not honoring requests for the JAIDS Reviews. <br /><br />Duesberg seems to believe that he is a legitimate scientist who will find redemption in Aneuploidy-Cancer. It is my hypothesis that Duesberg wants to go to the grave with an NIH grant secured so he can not only be vindicated but can also pay Leppo back for bankrolling his lab. Refusing to honor his word is counter to the impression that even he believes he is legitimate. <br /><br />If the reviews from JAIDS were personal attacks without merit, why not show the world? Post them at Celia Farber’s website? Or why not post them in some other credible news outlet, like the Onion? <br /><br />We would all like to see those reviews to judge for ourselves whether Duesberg was given his due. But we left with his refusal, which speaks volumes!Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-9821835974127640562009-08-16T10:23:19.622-04:002009-08-16T10:23:19.622-04:00This may be a digression from the original theme o...This may be a digression from the original theme of this thread, but the RA group's schism over whether HIV does not exist or does exist but is harmless is both amusing and pathetic. I see it as akin to:<br />A) Flat-earthers debating whether the world is triangular or square;<br />B) Loch Ness Monster hunkers arguing over whether Nessie is a fish or a reptile;<br />C) Moon-landing deniers discussing whether the faked landings were shot in New Mexico or Arizona;<br />D) Whether the CIA/Mossad used TNT or plastic explosive to blow up the World Trade Center; <br />E) Holocaust Deniers fighting over whether no Jews were slaughtered, or "only" a few hundred thousand.<br /><br />As previously noted, Bauer, Duesberg and the rest of the lunatics who constitute the RA group are no different from the members of all these other conspiracy groups - cuckoos, quacks, flakes and loony-toons the lot of them. But sadly, the actions of the AIDS denialists caused over 330,000 South Africans (plus of course American's like Maggiore's daughter, and she herself) to die unnecessarily of AIDS. And that removes these people from the world of the derisive and into the realm of the destructive. Which is, of course, why we take them on, head them off, and deal with them in whatever way we can - such as over the Medical Hypotheses papers.<br /><br />John P. MooreAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-76566044732793287952009-08-16T10:01:27.410-04:002009-08-16T10:01:27.410-04:00Just to set the record straight. I (John Moore) wa...Just to set the record straight. I (John Moore) was the poster of the August 12, 2009 12:59 PM posting under the name "Anonymous". As Seth knows, I have trouble with accessing his Blog in a way that records my name automatically as the poster, so I add my name at the foot of the message. In the latter case, I forgot, sorry. Unlike "Hank"/Bauer, I think that postings from professional scientists should be made in an identifiable manner. But of course "Hank" is by no reasonable definition, a "professional scientist", is he, she or it?<br /><br />In all the discussion of Chegwerde et al., I think it's worth mentioning that that group actually CONFIRMED the results in an earlier paper (by about one year) by Nicoli Nattrass in the social science literature. I don't have that paper to hand, here at home, but Seth could surely summarize its contents. Unfortunately, Nicoli's paper never received the attention it deserved, but she was right on the money, and gave an outstanding talk on the subject at a Keystone meeting last year. Duesberg et al. never bothered to respond to Nicoli's paper. Perhaps they don't read the literature all that avidly?<br /><br />I think it's a shame that Duesberg doesn't have the guts, or the integrity, to release the reviews of the JAIDS paper. Once one makes a public commitment, one should follow through. But of course what one would expect from the likes of Duesberg? And whatever "Hank" says, the decision of the Medical Hypotheses' publishers to retract the Duesberg and Ruggiero papers is definitive and final. What's still under review is the future of the journal itself, not those two papers.<br /><br />John P. MooreAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-6132191297732907032009-08-16T08:57:08.874-04:002009-08-16T08:57:08.874-04:00Hank,
""Circumcision preventing HIV tran...Hank,<br />"<i>"Circumcision preventing HIV transmission TO women was always a long shot".Apparently not too long a shot to try it out on some African guinea pigs.</i>"<br /><br />But circumcision did appear to lower the susceptibility of men contracting the virus. That is half the problem and if that half is addressed then at least some headway can be made. There are anatomical reasons why this makes sense and these same reasons are why it was a long shot that transmission from men to women would be affected. So circumcision is still a valid approach to helping with the problem in Africa (although by no means a perfect or foolproof one).Poodle Stomperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14071485010133858924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-21931816253710748582009-08-16T01:24:50.666-04:002009-08-16T01:24:50.666-04:00Snout,
I am sorry, but I honestly still don'...Snout, <br /><br />I am sorry, but I honestly still don't think you are getting it. <br /><br />Chigwedere's ARVs vs no ARVs speculation is used to accuse certain people. <br /><br />Let's put up your two scenarios:<br /><br />1. A crazy denialist leader does not accept the evidence for the hyposthesis that HIV causes AIDS and that ARVs increase the life span of an infected person by a median 6.7 life-years. This (dis)belief directly or indirectly resuls in X preventable deaths (actually it doesn't, it just postpones them, except arguably in the case of MTCT, which is why the impressive life-year calculation is resorted to).<br /><br />2. A rational always on the side of science leader, like George Bush (-:, knows that diverting political attention and funds to HIV and ARVs from other much more pressing causes will result in XXX truly preventable deaths, and yet he and the other usual suspects steam ahead with pepfar and what not.<br /><br />It could be argued that the difference between scenario 1 and 2 is that 1 acted in good faith although perhaps inexcusably so, whereas 2 just acted in bad faith.<br /><br />Why is only the leader in scenario 1 culpable? If the disbelief itself is what constitutes the crime, we are talking religion, puppy.Hanknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-66538356355694878232009-08-15T23:12:13.454-04:002009-08-15T23:12:13.454-04:00Chris...the entire sentence reads..
"There ...Chris...the entire sentence reads.. <br /><br />"There is no evidence that circumcision increases or decreases the risk of HIV transmission by HIV-infected men." Which has now been demonstrated. <br /><br />AIDS Deniers fear circumcision because in their case it is synonymous with a Frontal Lobotomy.Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-89966019391557445372009-08-15T23:01:09.645-04:002009-08-15T23:01:09.645-04:00Hank
You are fulfilling the mission of my blog… ...Hank<br /><br />You are fulfilling the mission of my blog… to expose the idiocy, moronic ignorance, and reckless harm to public health that is AIDS Denialism.<br /> <br />Thank you!Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-85038743867790482802009-08-15T18:06:17.617-04:002009-08-15T18:06:17.617-04:00"Circumcision preventing HIV transmission TO ..."Circumcision preventing HIV transmission TO women was always a long shot".<br /><br />Apparently not too long a shot to try it out on some African guinea pigs.Hanknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-7058392896189129472009-08-15T17:52:53.044-04:002009-08-15T17:52:53.044-04:00I'm submitting a manuscript to Medical Hypothe...I'm submitting a manuscript to Medical Hypotheses entitled <b>"AIDS Denialism at the University of Conneticut"</b>.<br /><br />According to orthodox dogma circumcision reduces the transmission risk of HIV - a sexually transmitted disease. However, this is contradicted by recent researchers have written "There is no evidence that circumcision increases or decreases the risk of HIV transmission..."[1].<br /><br />1. Kalichman S, Eaton L, Pinkerton S, 2007 Circumcision for HIV Prevention: Failure to Fully Account for Behavioral Risk Compensation. PLoS Med 4(3): e138. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040138Chris Noblenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-79287034658198141432009-08-15T17:28:03.286-04:002009-08-15T17:28:03.286-04:00Seth asked:
So Henry, has David ever expressed sy...Seth asked:<br /><br /><i>So Henry, has David ever expressed sympathy to you because you are afflicted with an un-natural penis?</i><br /><br />Seth, while I don't wish to dwell on such an unsavory subject as Henry Bauer's member, you are possibly making an unwarranted assumption: he has on at least two occasions publicly bewailed his tendency to develop candidal balanitis after taking broad spectrum antibiotics, which would suggest strongly (but not conclusively) that he is anatomically atypical compared to other males of his religious heritage.<br /><br />See: AIDS Denialist Bingo™ #042.<br /><br />There is possibly a speculative paper in this for someone with a Freudian bent. Perhaps it could be submitted to Medical Hypotheses.<br /><br />Hank,<br /><br />Yes, I do understand why you brought up the Halperin piece. You are quite transparently trying to divert the discussion into an area in which I think you will find that we are all in furious agreement in principle, if not necessarily about all the finer details. Setting up a straw man, in other words.<br /><br />It is perfectly reasonable if not essential to rationally examine priorities for finite resources when there are multiple competing needs. It is also reasonable to question whether foreign aid is appropriately targeted to the needs of the intended recipients, or whether it solely reflects the concerns of the donor. In practice, most foreign aid reflects a combination of both. <br /><br />However, my point is that HIV/AIDS denialism contributes nothing to such analysis - in fact it cripples it. How is it possible to make a rational decision about how much of the pie goes where if you are still hopelessly confused about the causes of a particular health problem and the costs and benefits of different interventions?Snoutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-78732869847988270922009-08-15T13:55:45.212-04:002009-08-15T13:55:45.212-04:00Speaking of Dan Halperin..
He says watch for his O...Speaking of Dan Halperin..<br />He says watch for his Op-Ed in the Washington Post on Monday...it raises awareness on the benefits of circumcision..Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-43030187317035917892009-08-15T12:41:56.544-04:002009-08-15T12:41:56.544-04:00JTD
I cannot be certain that Hank = Bauer. When ha...JTD<br />I cannot be certain that Hank = Bauer. When hank Blacksburg Va or nearby Roanoke or Salem are viewing the blog. A correlation that does not imply causation. Still, Hank sounds like Bauer. But you know, I have hundreds of hits a day – 6 IPs on this blog right now…including Salem Va. So maybe Hank is not Henry Bauer. It is hard to accept that there could be another AIDS Denier in Virginia as warped as Henry Bauer. Who knows? Who cares?<br />Hank, <br />it is your interpretation of the male circumcision trials that convinces me yet again you must be Henry Bauer. Undeniably idiotic. Circumcision preventing HIV transmission TO women was always a long shot. Male Circumcision can offer between 30% and 60% protection against Female to Male Transmission of HIV. Ultimately circumcision protects women from HIV as HIV prevalence in men declines. <br />Here is one better for you. Lisa Eaton and I have now published two letters/comments – in The Lancet and Plos Medicine pointing out the potential flaws in male circumcision alone for HIV prevention. A stream I have swam against.<br />We may be proven wrong and if we are I will not hang on to a failed idea… That would be soooo Duesbergian.Seth Kalichmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01715826946361587097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-633581663557175057.post-81326757646056049402009-08-15T11:48:25.859-04:002009-08-15T11:48:25.859-04:00Seth,
You know David Crowe, bless his heart, is...Seth, <br /><br />You know David Crowe, bless his heart, is a gaffe-a-minute. I assure you he encourages the freedom to express one's ethnic and religious affiliations through symbolic gestures, as long as it is not forced upon others. <br /><br />He is also a great fan of half solutions and futile human experiments such as: <br /><br />"THURSDAY, July 16 (HealthDay News) -- Circumcision doesn't reduce transmission of HIV from infected men to women, says a study that included 922 HIV-infected men in Uganda.<br /><br />The men, who were uncircumcised before the start of the study, were randomly selected to undergo immediate circumcision or circumcision after two years. The study also included HIV-uninfected female partners of the men. The women were checked for HIV infection at six, 12 and 24 months."<br /><br /><br />The study was stopped early due to "futility." The final analysis of 92 couples in the intervention group and 67 couples in the control group showed that 18 percent of women in the intervention group became infected with HIV, compared with 12 percent of those in the control group. Cumulative probability of HIV infection at 24 months was 22 percent among women in the intervention group and 13 percent among those in the control group."Hanknoreply@blogger.com