A blog about the 16th International AIDS Conference, Toronto, Canada, August 13-18, 2006.
At this morning's HIV Science and Responsible Journalism session, Laurie Garrett lamented the lack of visibility the AIDS conference had on the rest Toronto. It's true: driving from Montreal on Friday, I entered the city on the Don Valley Parkway, a thruway that avoids the city's congested streets and slingshots travelers to the downtown core. The only banner I saw was for the International Dragonboat Festival that ends today.
There were no red ribbons in Queen's Park. No advertisements on the subway. Newspapers were just about the only indication that more than 25,000 people were convening near the waterfront at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre.
One of the panel members was John Moore, an outspoken professor of microbiology and immunology at Cornell University. His message was clear: AIDS denialism kills. His talk covered their most egregious faults: the abuse of science (misrepresenting peer reviewed research), their failure to publish any of their own work in peer-reviewed journals (like the proponents of intelligent design), and the myths they spread (such as AZT is one of the world's most toxic chemicals).
Both Moore and Nathan Geffen, policy coordinator for Treatment Action Campaign in South Africa, plugged AIDS Truth as a means for journalists reporting on HIV/AIDS to get reliable information.
The panel discussion, which included the Marilyn Chase from the Wall Street Journal, Tamar Kahn, science and health editor at South Africa's Business Day, and Kim Honey, health editor at the Toronto Star, opened up a debate over whether journalists should challenge scientific consensus. Geffen opposed it, whereas audience-member Lancet chief editor Richard Horton launched a passionate plea for journalists to rise up to the task. He also accused us of being too polite, of listening to the dissenting views of denialists and printing their words because they are invited to speak on the world's stage. Isn't our job to keep the public informed about fact, not fiction?
Comments
Hannah,
He also accused us of being too polite, of listening to the dissenting views of denialists and printing their words because they are invited to speak on the world's stage.
So if you feel accused, why don't you stand up and defend yourself against this whining bagpipe?
Isn't our job to keep the public informed about fact, not fiction?
I think it is. Now, according to many "denialists", HIV causing Aids is pure fiction. Why should you not give any attention to that point of view? Because, if it is right, then ALL the articles about AIDS in today's mass media are composed of the purest b*llsh*t.
JS
---
http://www.nightsofarmour.com
Posted by: jspreen | August 16, 2006 7:42 AM
JS - I didn't feel accused, actually, and I felt Moore's comments were appropriate. Too many newspaper editors misunderstand what balanced reporting means when it comes to science and medical journalism. Those who believe "HIV causing AIDS is pure fiction" have been invited numerous times to publish their findings in peer reviewed journals, but have yet to do so. Science and medical journalism must be based on fact, not opinions, assumption or anecdote.
Posted by: Hannah | August 16, 2006 4:51 PM
Hanna,
I'm glad you published my comment and that you bothered to answer.
As long as nobody has clearly been able to explain, for example, how HIV destroys T-cells, which is an amazing thing in itself because not one single other retrovirus is know to do such things, "HIV causes Aids" is only an assumption. Thus, according to you definition, a causal relation between HIV and Aids shouldn't even be mentioned in any journal, scientific or not, otherwise than as a pure hypothesis.
But if we cannot discuss "HIV causing AIDS is pure fiction" because you feel (opinion! belief! assumption!) Moore's comments were accurate, we can maybe discuss some other aspects of HIV/Aids.
HIV tests are non specific. Fact!
Aids drugs are highly toxic. Fact!
Malnutrition may cause immunity deficiency. Fact!
People in Africa who are said to be HIV+, often suffer malnutrition. Fact!
Now:
We can never be sure that an HIV+ diagnosed person really is HIV+, simply because there does not exist one single accurate test in the whole wide world, but we can know for sure if a guy suffers from malnutrition. And what do we do: we get them on AZT and ARV's instead of giving them food. So instead of giving a patient healthy food he certainly needs, we give them poison he might not need at all.
Do we really need to get this published in Science or Nature before it becomes acceptable and logic?
And don't say that, of course, we give them to eat, because, this whole nutrition thing, I've never seen it being mentioned in the Aids research until some months ago, when I read something like: "Researchers have found that nutrition supplements may positively influence Aids therapy." And peer reviewed, by that.
Real-world comedy brought to new, undreamed of heights. Shame it's not funny at all.
Posted by: jspreen | August 17, 2006 12:30 PM
Do we really need to get this published in Science or Nature before it becomes acceptable and logic?
Abso-friggin'-lutely.
Posted by: Shelley Batts | August 17, 2006 9:38 PM
JS, you are the one with the view that isn't backed up by the scientific data and research. Your side must step up and offer a hypothesis and supporting data before anybody will give them the respect they crave. You can't demand to be listened to without evidence.
Are AIDS tests non-specific? All medical tests are specific to a certain extent. For most HIV tests, there are about 4 false positive results for every 1000 tests. This is why, in the US, multiple tests are performed to increase the accuracy of the screening.
Are AIDS drugs highly toxic? Yes, but everything is toxic at the right dose. But AIDS patients live longer on HAART than they do without.
Is nutrition important for AIDS patients? Yes. Nutrition is an important factor in the progression of all diseases.
Is malnutrition a problem for HIV+ individuals in Africa? For some, not for others. Proper nutrition improves health, but is not a substitute for HAART.
Very interesting work has been and is being done on how HIV kills T cells. Claiming that it doesn't exist, or that you aren't convinced won't change things for AIDS patients.
Trying to convince HIV/AIDS patients that HIV doesn't exist, or to go off their medication is simply unethical and dangerous to their health.
Posted by: Robster | August 18, 2006 3:37 PM