Audio interview with Dr. Henry Bauer on HIV/AIDS and other controversies

Alex Tsakiris of Skeptiko interviews Dr. Henry Bauer, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry & Science and author of Dogmatism in Science and Medicine, about scientific research and its dogmatic assertions.

Excerpts of the interview can be found here as well as the full 65mins of audio.


When going clean means getting more dirty

While one would accept that more testing would find more HIV patients in a county with an epidemic, one hopes that over time you will find less people testing positive under a prolonged needle exchange program. Current signs are not promising when there is an increase of HIV-positivity just over 2 weeks into such a program.

2 weeks is not enough, of course, as there may be many people who were seroconverted prior to the recent program’s institution, but if the program prolongs and HIV cases rise still, the blame should be on the abuse of the drug Opana itself.

Since Mr. Pence approved the temporary exchange, 5,322 clean syringes have been provided to 86 participants, health officials said Friday. About 1,400 used syringes have been returned.

Rethinking within the mainstream narrative

Trends in Molecular Medicine has published an open access opinion article by Jay A. Levy that demonstrates some open-mindedness in dealing with AIDS, read here.

What’s interesting is that – on the assumption of HIV theory as true, for argument purposes – the article nods at trying to strengthen innate (non-adaptive) immunity as opposed to just focussing on classic antibody (adaptive) immunity. You could bypass two problems with such a solution: you might not have to worry about confusing between the HIV-antibody-vaccinated and the HIV-infected since both groups would test HIV-positive, and you’re aiming at dealing with a precondition to HIV infection, which is any weakness of innate immunity (or existing immunodeficiency).
Dissidents would flip out Occam’s razor and say that you should only deal with the immunodeficiency that is evident, rather than try and pin things on HIV which seems to us resultant than causal.

The rest of the article almost shakes the hand of dissidents while firmly remaining on its side of the border. For example, questioning the validity of inflammatory markers, admitting “Prescribing ART for a lifetime is like giving chemotherapy forever“, showing doubts about treatment when asymptomatic, and noting that ART impairs immunity itself.