The Spectator and House of Numbers *update 2*
Posted by gimpy on October 22, 2009
Fraser Nelson over at the Spectator Blog is justifying The Spectator’s forthcoming showing of ‘House of Numbers’ as follows:
Is it legitimate to discuss the strength of the link between HIV and Aids? It’s one of these hugely emotive subjects, with a fairly strong and vociferous lobby saying that any open discussion is deplorable and tantamount to Aids denialism. Whenever any debate hits this level, I get deeply suspicious.
The link between HIV and AIDS is indisputable according to the scientific evidence. AIDS denialism has also contributed to the deaths of over 300,000 people in South Africa alone.
I am not sure what Fraser Nelson is suspicious of. I suspect he is just drumming up support for the screening and debate.
However, the debate is extremely unlikely to be helpful to the public understanding of HIV, AIDS and the relevant pseudo-science. Of the panel Richard Wilson has pointed out that:
all three ‘expert’ panelists have, at one time or another, adopted fringe views on HIV and AIDS, and been active in disputing the established scientific consensus. Of the five panel members chosen, only one [...] appears unambiguously to share the view held by the overwhelming majority of scientists currently involved in AIDS research.
I am not sure what the Spectator are aiming to achieve here. Their senior staff are not fools and I find it difficult to believe they are unaware of the lack of credibility of ‘House of Numbers’. This is likely little more than a misguided attempt at publicity. What is likely to happen however, is that they will have large numbers of crazed AIDS denialists in the audience screaming and shouting at those who criticise the film, their blog comments will be overrun with cranks and quacks and they will be regarded as part of a healthcare problem.
*update*
In 2004 The Spectator carried an article title “AIDS denial costs lives“. Perhaps Fraser Nelson can allay some of his suspicions by reading his own magazine.
*update 2*
The Spectator have apparently carried an article from Neville Hodgkinson in support of the film. Hodgkinson was the science journalist at the Times when they took a stance that questioned a link between HIV and AIDS in the late 80s/early 90s.
Chris Noble said
Perhaps they naively expect that if everybody just sits down together and discusses the evidence that it will get sorted out.
They obviously have no idea of the type of people they are dealing with.
Some HIV Denialists, like Peter Duesberg, accept that HIV exists but believe it is harmless. Other HIV Denialists question/deny whether HIV exists at all. Surely if they are rational people they can sit down and iron out their differences.
gimpy said
They might have a better idea now, the comments on their blog are now attracting comments from those whose ideas have become untethered from reality.
Neuroskeptic said
Is it legitimate to discuss the strength of the link between HIV and Aids? It’s one of these hugely emotive subjects, with a fairly strong and vociferous lobby saying that any open discussion is deplorable and tantamount to Aids denialism. Whenever any debate hits this level, I get deeply suspicious.
I heard a rumour that all the employees of the Spectator were Nazi pedophiles. Is it legitimate to discuss the possibility that all the employees of the Spectator are Nazi pedophiles? It’s one of these hugely emotive subjects, with a fairly strong and vociferous lobby saying that any open discussion is deplorable and tantamount to slander. Whenever any debate hits this level, I get deeply suspicious. No smoke without fire.
Marilyn Mann said
Hi Gimpy
Joe Sonnabend has written a blog post about House of Numbers. I thought you might be interested.
http://blogs.poz.com/joseph/archives/2009/10/a_new_aids_documanta.html
BLBS said
Do you think the comment from “Elliot” (#70) on Joseph’s blog is Elliot Grove? Scary if so.
Snout said
More likely Elliot Fox, the co-founder of the Association to Re-Evaluate AIDS (ATRA), which later became part of H.E.A.L. The other two founders of ATRA were Robert Bruckner (dec) and Mark Gibberish Conlan, of Zegners and House of Numbers infamy.
http://zengersmag.blogspot.com/2009/08/death-of-aids-dissident-by-mark-gabrish.html
Fox posts as “lightanddarkbalance” on AIDS Myth Exposed.
http://forums.aidsmythexposed.com/main-forum/5717-rethinking-aids-conference-2009-main-thread-5.html#post37504
Re: Chris’s comment above:
The AME thread is one of a number of current strings in which the denialists are ripping into each other as they line up the pledge allegiance to either Duesberg or the Perthians in the Great AIDS Denialist Civil War. It’s hilarious.
Fox’s description of Duesberg as a “pseudo scientist” is particularly precious.
yesalem said
Snout and Sikis,
You may open your grey cells to a scientist named
Bruce Lipton
and another by the name of
Dr. Hamer – founder of GNM
you will definitely not like them
Chris said
Bruce Lipton is a loon.
nioma said
All of this SIkis posts is to cover the fact that Mother Teresa and her staff during many decades used homeopathic remedies.
She helped countless suffering people, and set them on a better path of life.
the libel going on in these shameful blogs, no wonder you want the law off (and it is due to the bribe of Big Farma). They bought off the law, the governements.
A day will come.
Chris said
Mother Teresa had some serious financial irregularities in her foundation, very little went to the poor.
nioma said
You slander Mother Teresa. How far from the truth can you get.
A person that has dedicated her whole grown up life to help the sick and poor, ‘irregularities’ to take the emphasis away that she has used homeopathy and her sisters which were trained to use homeopathic remedies.
Damn you and your likes.
Vicky said
Slander? Oh please, look up words before you throw them around.
There have been numerous criticisms of how the money donated to her was spent (and sometimes where it came from in the first place). Read Colette Livermore or Christopher Hitchens for example. Are you saying that when someon “dedicates their life” failings become irrelevant? Is someone who uses cheap ineffective “medicine” to save money and spend it on convents really that good? Also this blog post is about “House of Numbers” – do you have anything to say about that or are you here just to defend homeopathy from reasonable criticism?
Chris said
Do you also believe in fairy tales? Here you go!
Remember, I am not the one selling placebos.