Another Tragic Case of AIDS Denialism: Kim Bannon

Another cast member of the AIDS Denialist film House of Numbers is dying of AIDS.

A post at the Denialist website 'Questioning AIDS Forum' reads "Kim Bannon gravely ill".  

"Kim is deteriorating rapidly and there is little hope left. As of now, she can still recognize people, but it seems this will not last long. Her delusions are getting worse. ...The dissident movement owes her a lot, and we can't afford to forget what she did for all of us."

It is fair to say that the 'AIDS Dissident Movement' owes Kim Bannon nothing less than her life.

In April 1992, at the age of 29, Kim Bannon tested HIV positive. She was diagnosed  at her local health department after learning that she may have been exposed to herpes. Kim was referred to a well known HIV/AIDS specialist, Dr. Donna Sweet of the Kansas University School of Medicine who described her diagnosis as "indisputable" and "classic".  Dr. Sweet told Kim that without proper treatment she would develop the full spectrum of AIDS within five to seven years and die soon thereafter.

But Kim is a rebel. A free thinker who unfortunately found what she was looking for - a way out. Seeking AIDS information on the Internet, Kim read that HIV tests are invalid and that HIV may not even exist at all. Kim believed what they said. She believed what she wanted to hear. She soon fell into a sea of convincing propaganda by AIDS Denialists from Perth Australia.

Kim ignored her test results  and refused treatment. And here we are today. Kim has AIDS. She is indeed gravely ill. 

Kim Bannon has told her own story. Here she describes how she became an AIDS Denialist.  

In April of 1992 I was twenty-nine years old. I was a well-respected business woman and an accomplished freelance court reporter in Wichita. I traveled frequently for business as well as pleasure. I spent a lot of time at the gym and in outdoor sports, and I took good care of my diet. I was attractive, healthy, intelligent, successful and energetic. Even though I’d been seeing a certain young man exclusively for a few months, I referred to myself as “happily single”. I was financially and spiritually independent, and my sense of well being was off the charts.

Then the certain young man in my life, Don, went to the local county health department for a sore he thought might be herpes. When he told me the nurses there had confirmed it as herpes, I thought the responsible thing to do would be to find out if I had it as well. At the health department, I was told that since I didn’t have a sore that could be cultured, they could not test me for herpes; but how would I like to have an AIDS test? They were offering it to everyone these days.

I was embarrassed and confused. I felt that a refusal of this AIDS test would be tantamount to a confession of illicit drug use or promiscuity. I had heard that anyone can get AIDS, but I still felt I was in a very low risk group. I agreed to the test and was told to come back in a week for my results.

A week later, I sat in the waiting area for two hours waiting to get my results. I was finally taken to a private exam room by two women. They apologized for making me wait for so long and then explained that the reason for my wait was because they were trying to figure out how to handle the situation. My test was positive. Almost everyone who tests positive is either gay or on drugs or suspects they are positive for some reason. Here I was a heterosexual female, non-drug user, non-prostitute, and I was really giving them a problem.

Then they told me it was just a “screening” test, which was called an ELISA. They said I was not in any risk group, and it would most likely turn out to be negative when I was given the “confirmatory” test. They wanted to know if I’d been recently pregnant, but they didn’t inform me of anything else that could cause a false positive result.......

On April 18, 2002, a friend of mine emailed a link to Nexus Magazine, asking me to check out an article about the benefits of coconut oil. As I scanned the magazine index for the title, I noticed another article entitled “The Yin and Yang of HIV”, and I clicked on it. It was long, it was technical, it was heavily referenced and footnoted. I decided to print it out after reading only a few paragraphs, and settled myself onto the sofa in the lodge to study it.

I emerged from the sofa several hours later in a state of amazement. I began with my friends at the Ranch, telling them what I had found. Then I emailed Dr. Valandar Turner of the Perth Group who had written the article, and at last I started searching the web. I could do nothing but read for hours and hours each day all of this enormous volume of information which confirmed the suspicions I had had about my own supposed “diagnosis” as well as giving support to the holes I perceived in the prevailing AIDS dogma.

Since that time I have done a tremendous amount of research into this subject, first for the purposes of my own health, then in outrage, and finally in an effort to help as many people as I can who find themselves in a similar situation as myself. Now, more than twelve years after my diagnosis, I remain healthy and have never taken any AIDS medications.

Kim became so convinced that her HIV diagnosis was meaningless, she launched a lawsuit against the companies that manufacture HIV antibody tests. Kim's law suit brought her increased attention from AIDS Denialists.

Kim followed the path of AIDS Denialism all the way to the poor house. She spent everything she had on acupuncture, Chelation Therapy, Meta-Physical Therapies,  and Scientology. Kim lost nearly everything in her pursuit of fake cures and quackery. Kim is not the first person to live the contradiction of seeking natural cures for a disease that she believes does not exist. 

Ultimately, Kim was featured in the AIDS Denialist film House of Numbers.  The film was shot in 2006 when Kim appeared healthy. But Kim was not healthy. Within two years of appearing in House of Numbers, Kim's condition deteriorated and she developed AIDS. Indeed, three people featured in House of Numbers have since died of AIDS. 

AIDS Denialists are now scrambling to explain Kim's declining health, especially because of her portrayal in House of Numbers. While Kim's family and doctors try to treat her HIV infection, the AIDS Denialists have other suggestions.

Celia Farber, for example, has written "It is clear she need (sic) intense and radical brain rehabilitation, and treatment for severe trauma, post traumatic stress disorder, brain injury, and over medication with HIV drugs and psych drugs."

Celia Farber recommends treatment at the Life Vessel Institute in New Mexico.

"The Life Vessel uses light, sound, frequency and vibration to balance the Autonomic Nervous System. Detoxify in our beautiful relaxing suites with Far-Infrared Saunas. Release subconscious emotional stress with our highly effective technology utilizing Voice Mapping, Galvanic Skin Response and Frequency. Deep tissue Pain Laser Therapy for back pain, sports injury, tennis elbow, carpal tunnel and many additional injuries. MEDI-SPA offering massage, Facial Treatments, DNA Cryo-Stem Cell Therapy, Micro-Current face enhancements for wrinkle reduction and lifting. Arasys III device for muscle building and inch loss."

The "Life Vessel Package" includes 'one Life Vessel Series of one hour on the first day, two hours on the second day and one hour on the third day.  One Asyra  to determine areas of stress in the body, and one Evox for emotional clearing" for a mere $895.

Another AIDS Denialist, Henry Bauer (also the leading authority on the existence of the Loch Ness Monster) cheers for Kim refusing HIV treatment.  

"Quite often I wonder how many other healthy women have been subjected to the same sort of ordeal that Onnie experienced for years and managed to survive. We know of Kim Bannon, Maria Papagiannidou, Audrey Serrano, Karri Stokely."

While Kim suffers full blown AIDS, Denialists are lying and denying. They are saying that Kim has health problems, but not caused by HIV.

AIDS Denialist Christine Maggiore did the same thing  when David Pasquarelli died of AIDS. Maggiore said it had been the stress of jail that killed him.  When Christine Maggiore died of  AIDS, Denialist Celia Farber said it must have been a 'radical detox' that killed her.  Other AIDS Denialists said that Christine Maggiore could not handle the stress of watching a Law Order SVU episode that portrayed her story of AIDS Denialism. That is right, they said she died from watching a Law and Order episode. AIDS Denialists die of anything, except AIDS.

The same AIDS Deniers are claiming that Kim is weak minded and unable to cope with stress. 

They are....

Lying about her past and present life situation.  

Saying that she was abused and traumatized, and that is why she is ill.

Implying that she is weak and unable to cope with stress. 

Claiming that HIV medications have caused her to become ill.

Kim's condition would be quite different if she had accepted treatment for her HIV infection. Tragically, and with the encouragement of AIDS Denialists, Kim Bannon refused treatment.

How have the AIDS Denialists contributed to Kim's deteriorating health? Kim's friend explained on her Facebook Page.

I have been friends with Kim since 3rd grade, best friends.......she was  always a Daddy's girl.......ALWAYS......everyone was jealous of their relationship, they were so close....Kim worked for her Father and things became tense and Kim removed herself from him and was involved in Scientology, at this time she also removed herself from our friendship, only to call a year later and acted like nothing had happened........this was Kim's personality......still is.......She and her Father are close again, they are Best Friends.....
 
 A little insight......I stayed with Kim many weekends when she was living at her parents home.......so her parents could get away from the 24 hr care......Kim required constant care......and she wasn't always, uhm, cooperative, she can be VERY difficult........I was with them when they made the decision to let her go to the AID's hospital in KC (that she wanted to go to) this was very difficult for them.......I received calls from both of them, they were in constant turmoil.....this was their baby, they couldn't put her into assisted living........it had taken toll on them and their health......they simply couldn't care for her any longer.  And she certainly made it clear that she would never move back to their  home. Ironically, she now asks me to talk her parents into letting her  move back home.........
 
 Kim and I spoke for hours and she wanted me to tell her story.....She  wanted me to help her write something to the effect of......The second  chapter.......living with AID's, she was taking the meds and she was  improving, I witnessed this, she was strong, she still had what my son  called her "6pack", she was still going to the gym and working out with a  personal trainer........she was eating all natural stuff.....(that made  me want to gag).......she was improving..........her mind was good, we did  a lot of talking about Non HIV AID's, she admitted at this point that she  had Aid's.........her counts were doing good........everything was  good.........she did have the neuropathy which she had started showing  signs in 2007....she had to be fed because of her arms trembling.......we  laughed, we cried...we remembered the old days......She felt the drugs  were saving lives.......This was July

Denialists started calling and she got off the meds......I stayed with her  one night, home health had been there til I got there.......she was delusional, she said the devil was on her arms and yelled for him to "Be  Gone".......it got worse quickly.......This was Sept or Oct.......This is  when she started speaking of the dentist and was in denial again......

Kim Bannon's story is chillingly similar to that of Lambros Papantoniou. Lambros died of AIDS. He too bought into AIDS Denialism. He was persuaded by AIDS Denialists to refuse treatment.  His friends are vocal about the role AIDS Denialist Andrew Maniotis played in Lambros' death. (see April 5, 2010 repost below) Maniotis is said to have gone so far as to actually talk with Lambros' doctors, telling them not to treat Lambros for HIV/AIDS. Instead, he wanted Lambros to go to Germany for an intensive nutritional treatment that would supposedly cure him of his ailments. Sound familiar?

AIDS Denialism is at its worst when it hooks those who are most vulnerable and sells them a bill of self-promoting false information that ultimately kills.

There is a lot of talk about the 340,000 South Africans who died at the hands of AIDS Denialists. But how many Kim Bannons and Lambros Papantonious are there?

No one knows. But 300,000 deaths from denialism is sounding like a small number.

Magic Johnson Turns 50 and He Thanks HIV Treatments

Where were you November 7 1991?

I know precisely where I was.

My student Tricia Hunter and I had just finished collecting AIDS attitude and behavior surveys in the Chicago transit system. We had been conducting a behavioral surveillance study with a cross section of the city. That is, we were asking the good people of Chicago to fill out surveys as they waited for their train.

I came home that evening to find Magic Johnson on the news. Earvin Magic Johnson, arguably the most recognized face in professional basketball, announced his retirement after testing HIV+.

I was in Chicago. Michael Jordon’s Chicago. The Champion Chicago Bull’s Chicago.

Perhaps with the exception of LA, no city could have been more stunned by Magic’s announcement than Chicago.



It quickly became apparent that our behavioral surveillance research had ended. Everything that America was thinking about AIDS changed in that moment.
UPDATE: Magic addresses the 2009 National HIV/AIDS Conference in Atlanta
Johnson "acknowledged him being HIV positive has been good for the movement to stop the spread of HIV by being able to raise awareness, but it also has been a “curse.”
I was depressed. Not only had this great man fallen to the scourge of HIV, but my first study as a new faculty member at Loyola of Chicago was screwed.
It was the next day that we realized how we could document what would become known as the Magic Johnson Effect. We could test whether the power of celebrity could change the course of an epidemic.

Tricia and I continued data collection and observed huge changes in AIDS attitudes and behavior in Chicago. The most pronounced changes occurred among those who identified closest with Magic Johnson - young men, particularly African American men. We saw dramatic increases in HIV testing that still have not returned to levels pre-November 7 1991. Our results mirrored those of a few other researchers who were in similar positions to compare the world before and after Magic Johnson’s announcement.

A few years later I had the opportunity to ask Magic Johnson for his autograph. He signed our article about the effect that his announcement had on Chicago men and women. Now how Geeky Cool is that?!

Magic said that he would need to start teaching again. And he has lived his promise.

Magic Johnson is literally a poster image for HIV treatments. He has been on antiretroviral drugs for at least 10 years. He has remained so healthy on antiretrovirals that many have mistakenly thought that Magic Johnson’s HIV infection is cured. Of course, he is not cured. But like countless others who receive HIV treatments, Magic Johnson is managing his HIV infection and he is thriving.

So what do the AIDS Deniers say about the successful treatment of Magic Johnson?

They deny it, of course.

Some AIDS Deniers say Magic is not HIV+.
Gary Null says that Magic Johnson is not HIV positive. “I got this call from Magic Johnson's top person asking would I help Magic Johnson. [We] had a long conversation. I sent him my protocols, by the way. Now, normally I don't go on the record with anyone I help. I've helped over 1300 very famous people, including members of the Royal Family, including people who are chair people of Committees in Congress and Senate….But Magic Johnson, I will go on the record and state that I would like Magic Johnson to have a blood chemistry test where I would tell what he would be tested for, Herpes 1, 2, and 6, and hepatitis. I would like to see, does Magic Johnson have herpes? Because if he has herpes, herpes will test you positive for the HIV virus.”

Some AIDS Deniers say Magic is HIV+ but he is lying about being treated.
“Magic Johnson presents a major problem for HIV dissenters, because he has stated in public that he takes his antiviral cocktail – the HAART regime – dutifully, and does not visibly suffer from fatty lumps and humps. Nor has he collapsed from kidney and liver damage, which dissenters claim is the fate of all who take these AIDS medicines, certainly within the many years that Magic has been taking his medicine after being diagnosed HIV positive. HIV dissenters like to solve the inconsistency with their counter-theory of the dangerous irrelevancy of anti-HIV drugs to AIDS by claiming that Magic has said privately he doesn’t touch the stuff.”

Other AIDS Deniers say Magic is being treated but not with AZT.
For example, Peter Duesberg alleges, Magic Johnson only took AZT briefly but then discontinued using it, and that is why he is healthy.

Magic Johnson has been on combination ‘drug cocktails’ that include AZT. He in fact has taken and promotes the drug Combivir that combines AZT with another antiretroviral. Magic Johnson is thriving on HIV treatments.

Other people with HIV who have refused treatment have not fared so well. Fellow Los Angelean Christine Maggiore refused treatment and died of AIDS-related complications at age 52. Maggiore's AIDS Denial was even impermeable to the Magic Johnson Effect. Now that is what you call denial!

Happy 50th Birthday Mr. Johnson!!

Wishing you many, many more!

denialism.blog Reviews Denying AIDS

Denying AIDS - A book by Seth Kalichman
Posted on: May 26, 2009 6:56 AM, by Mark Hoofnagle at denialism.blog

Seth Kalichman is a better man than me. Kalichman is a clinical psychologist, editor of the journal Aids and Behavior and director of the Southeast HIV/AIDS Research and Evaluation (SHARE) project, and he has devoted his life to the treatment and prevention of HIV. Despite a clear passion for reducing the harm done by HIV/AIDS, to research this book he actually met, and interviewed, prominent HIV/AIDS denialists. I confess I simply lack the temperament to have done this. To this day, when I read about HIV/AIDS denialists, and the the 330,000 people who have died as a result of HIV/AIDS denialism, I see red. I think violent, bloody thoughts.

The HIV/AIDS denialists, like Celia Farber, object to being called denialist, a quote from her in the book:

Those who wish to engage the AIDS research establishment in the sort of causality debate that is carried on in most other branches of scientific endeavor are tarred as AIDS "denialists," as if skepticism about the pathogenicity of a retrovirus were the moral equivalent of denying the Nazis slaughtered 6 million Jews.

To this I would reply that the HIV/AIDS denialists like Duesberg are worse than holocaust deniers. Holocaust deniers are anti-semitic bigots and horrible people sure, but the HIV/AIDS denialists are responsible for an ongoing campaign of death. Because people like Duesberg have convinced morons like Thabo Mbeki of their pseudoscience, hundreds of thousands of people are dead.

This is why I see red. Denialist is about the nicest thing you could call the likes of Farber and Duesberg.

Kalichman's book is well-written, timely, thoroughly researched, and to his great credit he uses my definition of denialism. Ha! How could I help but love this book? The fact that he pursues denialism from a psychological angle, and interacts directly with the critical denialists behind this story make it a profoundly important study and resource in understanding not just HIV/AIDS denialism, but all forms of denialist pseudoscience. This takes a very patient, very dedicated person. I would have lost my temper, lost my patience, or lost my mind to have delved so deep into this madness. Not to mention, I'm not very forgiving or nice to people I perceive as being so detrimental. It's a personality flaw, I recognize it. That's why we're lucky to have people like Seth Kalichman.

Let's discuss some of Kalichman's findings below the fold...

First off, in his introduction he describes what it was like interacting with denialists:

My relationships with denialists created some complicated arrangements that allowed me to experience denialism face-to-face. I often felt more like a journalist than a scientist, giving me a glimpse of how it must feel when denialist journalists delve into science. Still, it is important to say that the denialists who interacted with me did not seem evil. They are deeply skeptical of science and untrusting of government and big business. Some are surely misguided and others seem to foolishly believe that they understand everything there was to know about AIDS. But I did not find them evil in the sense they were intesnt on harming people, even though their actions surely are. Of course, those I have come to see as malevolent - the vitamin pushers con men, and angry academics are the ones who did not respond to my attempts to contact them.

Fascinating. I would be surprised if Kalichman had found them to be overtly sinister, like some disease-denying caricatures reminiscent of Mr. Burns on the Simpsons. I think in light of this description we must remember the phrase the banality of evil used by Hannah Arendt to describe Eichmann. Evil isn't always blocking out the son or stealing candy from infants, or always performed by the sociopaths and madmen of history. Sometimes evil is perpetrated by those who are operating without ill intent within a framework that is twisted and wrong, and this is one of the most important lessons of history. Ordinary people who are perfectly normal are capable of doing great harm under the authority of those with radical ideology. See also the Milgram experiment or the Stanford Prison Experiment as examples of this phenomenon. To find them ordinary, if anything, is what one would expect of foolish people who have adopted the warped and devastating ideology of the HIV/AIDS denialists. This does not exonerate them, it merely informs us of the work we need to do to fight against the thoughtless obeisance to ideology which causes so much human misery.

Kalichman starts with a definition of denialism, a description of HIV/AIDS denial and a justification for using the term. And here is my only criticism of the text. I believe that in defining denialism, he does not succinctly describe the critical elements. This is probably a result of my bias towards my own methods of describing the critical elements of denialism. He does cover them all, going into depth in the importance of conspiracy and suspicious personality traits endemic to denialists as a whole. His discussion was of the defining characteristics was of great value though, and I left feeling as though I learned a great deal about the psychological gray zone between simple denial that most people exhibit in the face of hard truth, the ignorant denial of followers, and the more malignant form of denial that is practiced by the leading pseudoscientists. His subsections on "Suspicious Minds" and "Why AIDS, Why Now" I think are truly novel contributions to the discussion of denialism and provide great information as to the motives and sources of denialist arguments.

His second chapter is an extensive discussion on Duesberg. I was also fascinated by his interaction with Duesberg, who not only sounds like he is fundamentally broken mentally, but ignorant of virology. Kalichman writes "Even knowing the complexity of HIV and the barriers it poses to vaccines, Peter Duesberg looked me dead in the eyes and said that failure to achieve and HIV vaccine means that an infectious agent cannot be the cause of AIDS". I immediately smacked my head and thought, does he also deny that the Hepatitis C virus causes Hepatitis despite antibody response? Or that herpes viruses cause a host of chronic infections despite the presence of antibody? Not every virus is easily vaccinated against, that doesn't mean they're non-infectious or can't cause disease. This is a stunningly stupid statement from a virologist. Duesberg is not just an HIV/AIDS denialist, but also denies the role of viruses in cancer, apparently rejecting the mountains of evidence that HPV causes cervical cancer, that any other virus causes cancer, or that cancer can be caused by gene mutation. I would point out again that he seems ignorant of virology despite extensive experience in the field. How about EBV and Burkitt's Lymphoma? There is no other cause of the disease. Or HHV-8 and Kaposi Sarcoma? Duesberg is a classic crank - incompetent and completely unaware of it, and Kalichman lays out his successive use of each of the denialist tactics from conspiracy, to utterly dishonest cherry-picking of data and quote-mining, to logical fallacies. The image emerges of a man who is just contrary, no matter what he refuses to accept any idea that is mainstream, even if it is true. Kalichman spends the rest of the chapter laying out Duesberg's case, which is laughable, and then smashing it, he even alludes to some nice crank magnetism from the cdesign proponentsists, radical libertarians and environmental extremists. Gems include Duesberg's denial that children or sex-workers die of AIDS. The ability of his delusion to protect him from the reality of AIDS is astonishing, and deadly. Somehow, Kalichman's final summary of Duesberg is ultimately too charitable:

Peter Duesberg's legacies will be that he both discovered the first cancer-causing gene and that he brought a sort of legitimacy to a band of sad denialists and wacky pseudoscientists. How one man could be the source of so many lives saved and so many lives lost is the greatest paradox and human tragedy in this whole contorted affair.

Kalichman has to stretch to say positive things about a man who ultimately comes across as a dishonest contrarian, and an insufferable self-aggrandizer. I also would disagree that he has saved any lives for his discovery of src, as it's not as if it would never be discovered if it wasn't for him. It's not like science is art, and only one artist can create some unique work. It's clear that Duesberg has only been a net negative for humanity and science.

Kalichman's description of pseudoscience in chapter 3 is spot on, but I think more or less synonymous with denialism. I believe denialism is the pseudoscientific method, or at least describes its components. He proposes pseudoscience is kind of an applied form of denialism by quasi-experts seeking legitimacy through a more precise mimicry of the trappings of science - fake journals, fake experts, fake peer review etc. I'm not sure one can say they are truly different, but his description of AIDS pseudoscience is great and more extensive debunking of the variety of denialist claims about the existence or non-existence of HIV and AIDS. Many things become clear, especially the tendency of anti-medical pseudoscientists to blame the victim. Almost all of the the denialist theories seem to find a way to make it the victims fault - their lifestyle, their diet, their genetics, etc. which may feed back on their need for control His close examination of their arguments is sometimes grueling for someone with a medical education, I think my forehead has developed a welt from how many times I smacked it. For instance, I hadn't heard about Celia Farber's theory on HIV and infants:

Journalist Celia Farber confuses HIV infection with antibody responses when she states that all babies born to HIV positive mothers are born HIV positive and that all babies born to HIV positive mothers are born HIV positive and that most become negative months later...In this respect Farber is suggesting that all babies born to women with HIV/AIDS have HIV infection.

Facepalm! In humans, there is a IgG transport system across the placenta that delivers maternal antibodies to the infant so that when it is born it enjoys protection from various infections until its own immune system gets its legs under it. This way infants have much of the same acquired immunity as their mothers for the first few months of life. Since the HIV test tests for the presence of antibodies, this gives a false-positive test until the maternal antibodies disappear and, if the infant is positive, they generate their own HIV antibodies. HIV doesn't readily cross the placental barrier, which is why AZT given before labor, not even during the whole pregnancy, is highly protective against transmission of the virus to the child as it is usually infected during birthing. Why are we even arguing with people so ignorant of basic biology? They don't understand human development, they don't understand immunology, they don't understand virology, they don't even understand how an ELISA assay works, but they'll propose their incompetent use of it discredits the work of every HIV/AIDS researcher in the world! It's maddening to hear these cranks assume the mantle of the likes of Galileo and Einstein - minds that may occur maybe once a century - when they are clearly so completely incompetent. The arrogance is astounding.

After icing my forehead...He forgets to mention Michael Fumento as a denialist for his promotion of the myth that heterosexual sex does not transmit HIV. He's a general-use infectious disease promoter who routinely uses the success of public health efforts as proof they're not needed. After all, if disease doesn't get transmitted, why should we think it has anything to do with public health interventions?

In his fourth chapter he summarizes the dominant conspiracy theories, again a thorough job, as well as an excellent sub-chapter on why denialists make people like me so crazy. In the fifth he makes sure not to let Reagan off the hook in a discussion of political elements of HIV/AIDS denialism. And the last chapter deals with the question of how to get people out of denial. Importantly he recognizes the nature of how denialism is spread, starting with a few sources and then expanding outwards through the echo chambers of the internet. There are few original ideas in denialism, and while good ideas come and go, bad ideas last forever. He has some good suggestions of intellectual shortcuts to avoid BS that I'm sure most of my readers are familiar with. He also recognizes the diverse ideological radicalism which contributes to the formation of these ideas. Whether it's anti-medical cranks, environmental cranks, libertarian cranks, they tend to come to the topic of HIV/AIDS with an ideological axe to grind, rather than truly caring for the victims of the disease. Thus I think their moral position deteriorates further, they use the death of millions and ongoing illness and death of innocent men, women and children to further their bigotry against modern medicine, or to promote their toxin paranoia, or their politics.

He also has inspired me to conduct a kind of experiment. Simply put, denialism is an outgrowth of a certain personality type that is dysfunctional. These people with suspicious/paranoid beliefs, a tendency towards conspiracism, and lack of critical reasoning skills are all over the country and all over the world. They interpret events in a predictable manner. I ask the readers to consider world events from this perspective. Let's see if, in the face of a crisis or other major event, we can predict what those with this conspiratorial mindset will come up with as an explanation. I'm curious to see if we can come up with their unique conspiracy theories before they do. Maybe the next time we see something big break in the news if we can successfully conduct this experiment here at denialism blog.

To sum up, this is a well-written engaging book that should serve as a resource for anyone interested in critical thinking, and just as a fascinating story of how things can go awry in the public understanding of science. It's also the best work I've seen so far in evaluating the psychology of the believers causing all the trouble. This is a subject which needs more attention, and I hope to write about it more in the future.

So buy it! All royalties go to the purchase of anti-retrovirals for people in Africa, so you not only help yourself but you help undo some of the damage done by denialists like Duesberg and Mbeki.

Mark Hoofnagle has a MD and PhD in physiology from the University of Virginia, and is now a general surgery resident. His interest in denialism concerns the use of denialist tactics to confuse public understanding of scientific knowledge.

Damage Done: Why We Should Care About AIDS Denialism

Is AIDS denialism a problem? How widespread is AIDS denial? Are people who question that HIV causes AIDS given any attention?

People who care about HIV/AIDS are well aware that misinformation undermines prevention and treatment efforts. The spread of myths takes its greatest toll on the Internet, where pseudoscience is easily mistaken as science. There are perhaps thousands of people who refuse HIV testing, ignore their HIV positive test result, and avoid treatment because denialists persuade them that there is a debate among scientist about what causes AIDS. To many of us AIDS denialism is undoubtedly a significant social problem. But what is the evidence? What objective data do we have that says AIDS denialism is rabidly undermining AIDS prevention and treatment? On what basis should we think AIDS denialism is widespread?


UPDATED May 9, 2009

Only recently has social science research started to examine AIDS denialism.A survey of Gay and Bisexual men in 4 US cities found that 45% believe “HIV does not cause AIDS” and 51% believe that “HIV drugs can harm you more than help you.” This finding is remarkable because Gay men in the US may be among the most AIDS educated in the world. Or so we have thought.


One in five men and women in Houston believe that “AIDS is an agent of genocide created by the US Government to kill of minority populations.”

A study of people living with HIV/AIDS shows that 23% believe “There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS” and 36% say “there is a debate among scientists about whether HIV causes AIDS.” (Kalichman et al., 2009, in process)

In South Africa, where AIDS denialism perpetrated what South African advocates have called crimes against humanity, 42% of people at high-risk for HIV/AIDS believe that medicines for AIDS do more harm than good.

AIDS denialists actively undermine prevention and treatment

AIDS denialists persuade people that AIDS charities, such as Product (RED) Campaign, are fraudulent. Denialists have handed out anti-(RED) flyers at promotional events and taken other actions to undermine the charity.





AIDS denialists stage activist-style events and distribute AIDS denialism literature at community health fairs, gatherings, and other social events.

AIDS denialism is responsible for the death of 350,000 South Africans and 35,000 HIV infections in babies could have been prevented if not for AIDS denialist policies.

AIDS denialists organize campaigns telling people not to get tested for HIV. The testimonials of people with HIV who have chosen not to take HIV treatments are used to persuade others to refuse treatment.


AIDS denialists have inspired heads of African states to concoct cures for AIDS, including the President of Gambia. AIDS denialists bolster the sale of herbal cures and other snake oil. The proliferation of profiteering from fake AIDS cures is a direct outgrowth of AIDS denialism.

AIDS denialists try to influence public opinion and social policy.

AIDS denial has seeped into the mainstream media and popular culture with endorsements from the rock band Foo Fighters and
comedian Bill Maher, and denialists have gained access to major outlets like Harper’s Magazine and Scientific American .

The most organized AIDS denialism group regularly issues press releases to create an image of legitimacy that have been picked up by mainstream media.

AIDS denialists senselessly caused the stop of pediatric HIV medication trials in New York.

Conspiracy theorizing joins AIDS denialism with various anti-government and hate groups. (click link and search Rasnick)


AIDS denialists try to influence public policy by meeting with policy makers, such African leaders and members of the US congress.

AIDS Denialists file libel suits against those who call them on their conspiracies and expose them for their nuttiness.
They have infiltrated criminal courts and hijacked health policies.


Searching the Internet shows that AIDS denial is widespread.
AIDS denialist groups are active in several countries, including HEAL Groups and other denialist support systems that exist in most major cities.

There are hundreds of homemade AIDS denialists videos posted on the Internet. Gary Null has produced feature length films that pose as documentaries on YouTube. Robin Scovill, husband of the late Christine Maggiore, and Robert Leppo produced “The Other Side of AIDS” as a full length film. Another well-financed pseudo-documentary on AIDS is ”House of Numbers” which premiered at the 2009 Nashville Film Festival. The still image to the left shows filmmaker Brent Leung on the set. Notice AIDS Denialst and conspiracy theorist David Rasnick is present as well.

There are AIDS denialist groups active on every continent except Antarctica (see links on this page) with denialism escalating in the US, Greece, Australia, India, and Latin America.

AIDS denialism is a threat to public health and demands our attention. Ignoring AIDS denialism is itself a state of denial that does not solve the problem. Exposing AIDS denial is only a start to reducing its harms.

The Christine Maggiore Story: Final Chapter?

Christine Maggiore, the most visible AIDS denialist activist, died last December. As posted here and in many places, her death was no mystery. Having tested HIV positive in 1992 and refusing modern medical care, Christine Maggiore died from complications of AIDS. At the time we knew her death involved her suffering from pneumonia. We now know from her death certificate that the immediate cause of her death was disseminated herpes viral infection. This disease is so specific to CD4 cell loss it almost never occurs outside of HIV infection. Her bilateral bronchial pneumonia was an underlying condition that contributed to her death. Essentially, Christine Maggiore’s immune system collapsed. She was under the care of Ilona Abraham, a provider who had earned their degree from the Semmelweis University, the same Semmelweis that has not so clean hands having recently given Peter Duesberg and Celia Farber awards for their truthiness on AIDS. Christine Maggiore was a denialist to the end, choosing a provider who specializes in the use of chelation, mercury detoxification, homeopathy, and nutritional supplements rather than a modern medical doctor who may have actually been able to help her.

In yet another development in the sad story of Christine Maggiore, her husband Robin Scovill has settled their lawsuit against the Los Angeles Coroner’s office for allegedly erring when it determined their 3-year-old daughter Eliza Jane had died of AIDS-related causes.

According to the LA Times "The lawsuit demanded up to $10,000 for each violation of Eliza Jane's right to privacy, plus unspecified damages". The case was settled for $15,000. This ends another chapter in the saga of Christine Maggiore.

These sad details, as undeniable as they are, will mean nothing to AIDS denialists. The life and death of Christine Maggiore continues to inspire them to turn away from medicine and science. That is why, after all, it is called denialism.

UPDATE: How do AIDS denialists deny the undeniable? Visit AIDS Myth Exposed Forums and find out. Try this one on for size...