Corrections to The Origins, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory (McFarland 2007)
I am very grateful to those who tell me of errors in the book. If you find any more, please
Mycoplasmas: Phyllis Pease is cited incorrectly with respect to mycoplasmas. She agrees that Montagnier's
experiments (Lemaitre et al. 1990, 1992) show that a cytopathic mycoplasma was present, but does not accept that this mycoplasma is a co-factor with HIV to produce AIDS. The obvious but more prosaic interpretation of the presence of mycoplasmas in Montagnier's cultures is that these were simply common laboratory contaminants, notorious from the '60s for disastrous mistakes particularly in attributing their cell-killing abilities to viruses. Unfortunately, these lessons were forgotten by the Gallo group in particular and led to the belief that "HIV" was the cell-killer. The fact that "HIV" does not kill cells directly was not admitted until 1995, although the reason for the mistake has never been admitted by the mainstream. The (in)famous H9 line developed by Gallo et al. had in fact developed resistance to the contaminating cytopathogenic mycoplasmas, NOT to the non-cell killing "HIV". On p. 125 I imply that mycoplasmas could carry alien DNA which could trigger an immune response; however, the vector envisaged by Pease is actually bacterial, as described on p.104 and figure 7.9 in "AIDS, Cancer and Arthritis: A New Perspective".
Page 34, ¶ 2, last sentence:... "Between 1997 and 2003, syphilis increased in the West and Northeast,
remained roughly the same in the Midwest, and decreased in the South (Figure 8)." SHOULD READ "Between 1997 and 2003, syphilis increased in the West and South, remained roughly the same in the Midwest, and decreased in the Northeast (Figure 8)."
Page 40, caption of Figure 2 should obviously read "13-17", not "13-16, 17"
Page 96, 2nd-last ¶:Only the Root-Bernstein citation has instances of reversion from HIV-positive to HIV-negative. The Duesberg citation, and the 30+-page Appendix in Maggiore, describe HIV-positive people who never became ill. (Christine Maggiore herself had experienced positive, negative, and inconclusive tests at various times.) Page 162, ¶ 3, lines 8-9:"Falsifiability" as a criterion for scientific status never did gain much support
within philosophy of science, but Popper himself never retracted the suggestion.
INDEX says "babies, see newborns" --- but there is no entry for "newborns"!
babies 86, 99-100, 130, 167, 172
newborns 25, 72, 80, 81, 97-9
Cavicchi, Jon R. n.d. The science court: a bibliography. www.piercelaw.edu/risk/v014/spring/bibliography.htm
should be "volume 4", not "v014", that is www.piercelaw.edu/risk/vol4/spring/bibliography.htm
Creemers ... should be Transplantation 65, 285-287.
This page was last updated: October 18, 2009