cases is almost the same as there are in the whole country of the United States,
Even though they have two-and-a-half to three times our population. I'm talking about AIDS cases, not HIV-positives.

GM: When you say the same in Africa are you talking on a per-capita basis
or actual --

DR: No, I'm talking about actual total numbers. The total number of AIDS
cases that the WHO has published is under one million for the entire continent
of Africa in 19 years.

GM: There are actually more sick people in the United States than the continent
of Africa?

DR: There was for a while. About 2 years ago there were more documented
AIDS cases in the US than the whole continent of Africa. Yet they have two-
and-a-half to three times our population.

GM: They can't possibly test every one of those people as being HIV-positive
in Africa. Do they?

DR: No.

GM: Do they just assume that they have AIDS?

DR: Yes. They basically assume they have AIDS. But using the Bangui
definition, the 1985 definition of AIDS in Africa, it doesn't even require
HIV as part of the definition, because they can't afford to do the test anyway,
and the test is totally unusable in Africa because of the false positives with
hepatitis B, malaria, tuberculosis, which are endemic of sub-Saharan Africa.

They use clinical symptoms. There are four basic clinical symptoms in the
Bangui definition; there's 10% weight loss, there's persistent fever and cough,
and diarrhea. That's it.

Think about it. I was in the Peace Corps in Papa, New Guinea and I had all
of those. That makes me a long term survivor based on that definition of AIDS. Think of it, in a place like Africa, where you have random poverty, malnutrition, poor sanitation, bad water, and parasitic diseases--guess what the symptoms are. And tuberculosis, too. Tuberculosis is worldwide. Where you have poverty you
have tuberculosis, including the United States and Europe. It's a disease of poverty, brought on by malnutrition.

The world's leading cause of immune depression is malnutrition, which is
typically due to poverty. Well-fed people who are exposed to TB do not
get the disease TB. Anytime you have endemic TB in a society it's a clear
indication of the level of poverty in a society. One of the symptoms of
TB is a persistent cough. In 1993 they actually added TB to the 1985
Bangui definition of AIDS. Isn't that interesting? Regular TB which has
been endemic there for how long is now called AIDS in Africa.

GM: The mainstream media is always reporting that dissidents like you and
Duesberg have been discredited, but yet I never see them show any
evidence of that, and they never interview you, just the HIV
establishment doctors. I saw a recent piece on "60 Minutes" and it just
showed how these doctors were infuriated with you guys.

DR: I'm sure they are infuriated because people call us dangerous, and I
agree with them completely. Peter Duesberg, I, and the other dissidents…
we are very dangerous people. The question is; dangerous to whom?

We're certainly not dangerous to HIV-positive people. We're not dangerous
to hemophiliacs. We're not dangerous to Africans. But we are lethally
dangerous to the HIV establishment. To the people who are on that $8
billion taxpayer gravy train, in the USA every year that goes to AIDS.
The $1.8 billion that goes to the National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases only for HIV research. We're very dangerous to those
folks.

We're dangerous to the careers and reputations of those 100,000
scientists and physicians who stake their careers and reputations on this
bogus contagious HIV hypothesis. We are dangerous to those journalists,
politicians, and celebrities who have also attached their names and
reputations to this bogus HIV hypothesis.

So indeed we are very, very dangerous people and I admit that. But we
haven't killed anybody. As a matter of fact, as a consequence of our
work, there are certainly thousands of people who are alive today that
would not be alive had they been left alone with the insanity of the HIV
hypothesis to drag them down in that spiral of taking the drugs that
eventually cause the AIDS diseases. You know, I heard this within this
year, that we had been discredited. That was news to me. If we have been
discredited, that's all fine and good, all I ask is where and by whom and
when were we discredited so I could go back and see how we were
discredited because it's all news to me.

GM: Where do you see the whole scenario going? Do you think the media
still will be reporting that new AIDS drugs are on the way, etc.?

DR: No, it's over with. It's crumbling from within, just like the former
Soviet Union. The foundations are so poor. AIDS attracts probably the
poorest quality scientists and physicians you could imagine. I mean,
David Ho is below mediocre in his capability. I've met many of these
people in the last two or three years and there's one or two I've met
that are really top notch scientists. It's a real pity that they have
associated themselves with this stinking mess of HIV. The majority of
them I've met are mediocre and below. Usually the higher up they are on
the ladder the poorer quality they are. Oh, they're rich, there's no
doubt about that. Like Peter [Duesberg] said, most of his colleagues at
Berkeley are now multimillionaires.

GM: Ten years it'll be gone?

DR: Oh, ten years it'll be long gone. It's virtually disappeared in the
US. There's almost no interest in it, even in San Francisco.

GM: What about the recent news stories about how the epidemic has been
exploding in San Francisco now?

DR: That's a sign of how fast it's disappearing. The fact that the
AIDS-HIV establishment in San Francisco, and other places, have to revive
it. It's going away, so they go to these extremes and shoot from the hip
and make these bogus statements that were in the newspapers recently
about this burst of HIV infections and all that crap. They're lies. AIDS
has always been fueled by lies, but now it's just getting more blatant.

AIDS is disappearing in the US, that's why Africa is now in the
newspapers and it'll be India probably later and maybe China eventually.
You know what Texaco did when Texas started drying up. No more oil. They
moved east to Saudi Arabia and places like that. The AIDS establishment
doesn't want the gravy train to disappear. They're not the brightest
people in the world but they're not crazy.

This goes to the heart of our democracy. Our institutions are corrupt.
They need to be restructured. The National Institutes of Health, the
Centers for Disease Control are both military organizations. They have
uniforms and ranks. A lot of people don't know that. They come under the
executive branch of government. The president is their ultimate boss.
Clinton, this summer, made AIDS a national security issue, which
automatically brings in the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and the Joint Chiefs
of Staff. That's the problem when you have a national security issue. You
can abrogate civil rights. We haven't felt the ramifications of that yet,
but I'm sure we will.

GM: Ironically, I remember many people, especially liberals like myself
back then, being upset that Reagan ignored AIDS and didn't get the
government involved enough.

DR: He did ignore it, but he screwed up. When he said something about it
was in 1984 at that famous Gallo press conference which got the snowball
rolling. It was an election year in 1984. The first four years of AIDS
were the first four years of his administration. He never said a word
about AIDS before 1984. Not one. Then there was a gay activist who was
paraded around the White House in the late winter.

I am convinced that the April press conference was a preemptive strike
that was meant to erase AIDS as a campaign issue. A lot of people say it
brought it to the fore. I'm convinced it had the opposite intent, to
erase it from any importance as a campaign issue. The April press
conference was perfect in diffusing AIDS as a potential campaign issue

continued

previous page
because it said we figured it out and it was another triumph for American
science and medicine because an American discovered what AIDS is and in
two years we'll have a vaccine for it, which would have made it 1986, two
years into Reagan's second term.