|
|
|||
|
Tony Floyd, Medical Student Newcastle University, Newcastle Australia
Send response to journal:
|
I was (perhaps naively) hoping that alternative AIDS arguments on this page might stand up to scrutiny a little better than they have amongst the responses to David Spurgeon's article. Providing links to journal articles which were falsely implicated as supporting revolutionary ideas about AIDS has been met with either silence or a change of topic by those who have posted the misinformation. The pattern is very much continuing here. Work by David Gisselquist has been cited in support of alternative AIDS arguments. Gisselquist and others have most certainly published work suggesting that iatrogenic mechanisms of HIV transmission have been underestimated. Please explain (as I have asked already) where there is evidence that "According to Gisselquist and his colleagues HIV is not transmitted by ‘sex’ "(1) In addition to the links to Gisselquist articles above which entirely disprove such claims, he has recently published an article about Heterosexual transmission of HIV(2):
The fact that 'most experts' claim it is 90%, and that Gisselquist thinks it approximately 30%, leads one to ask why he has been cited to support claims that HIV isn't sexually transmitted?
References: (1) Papadopulos-Eleopulos. Low rates of heterosexual transmission and the HIV theory of AIDS. BMJ Rapid Response 24 March 2003 (2) Gisselquist D, Potterat JJ. Heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa: an empiric estimate. Int J STD AIDS. 2003 Mar;14(3):162-73. PMID: 12665438 [Abstract] Competing interests: None declared |
|||
|
| ||||