Outrage sparked by Brighton University film showing (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Outrage sparked by Brighton University film showing
6:20pm Monday 10th December 2012 in News By Bill Gardner
A university professor has been criticised for suggesting to his students that HIV does not cause Aids.
Activists are planning to protest against the screening of a controversial film at University of Brighton on Wednesday, December 12.
Hundreds of students were invited to the event by Dr Karl Cox, who invited them to “find out the truth about HIV”.
The film, House of Numbers, suggests the virus does not cause the killer disease Aids. It has been widely discredited by the scientific community.
Among a number of claims, it suggests blood tests are unreliable, HIV diagnoses are wrong and that the virus is a work of fiction created to sell more medicines.
In Dr Cox’s email invitation, he asked students: “How accurate are HIV tests? Is HIV fact or fiction?”
More than 100 people have signed an online petition calling for the film’s screening to be cancelled. On Facebook, students have organised a non-violent protest to take place during the showing.
'Dangerous'
Jesse Laffan, a 23-year-old student from Portslade, said the film was “completely misleading”.
He said: “I find this quite affronting, with World Aids Day having been so recent and living in a city where HIV transmission is a real issue.
“I think promoting this is dangerous, especially to young students.”
The film is being shown on University of Brighton premises in conjunction with a charity called the World Foundation for Natural Science.
On its website, the organisation describes its mission as, “healing this world in accord with Natural Law, thus restoring Divine Order on this precious Planet Earth. For only this way real solutions for the challenges man and nature are facing can be found”.
One Aids sufferer from Brighton said Brighton University’s decision to allow Dr Cox to screen the film was “unbelievable”.
'Gobsmacked'
Andy – not his real name – said: “Why would they want to teach their students dangerous nonsense which teaches them not to bother taking precautions?
“I’m gobsmacked, to be honest. It’s hard enough to get the message through to young people without them being exposed to stupid films like this.
“The university should cancel the showing immediately.”
A spokesperson for HIV and sexual health charity Terrence Higgins Trust, said: “We have always had serious concerns about this inaccurate, misleading and irresponsible film.
“That’s why, as the leading HIV and sexual health charity, staff from Terrence Higgins Trust will be on hand after any screening of this film at the university to ensure that the students have access to the facts about HIV.”
A University of Brighton spokesperson said: “Our position is absolutely clear. We regard HIV and Aids as extremely serious matters of concern and we provide our students with advice and we support research into these issues.”
The spokesperson said the university would be reviewing whether or not to allow the film to be shown on university premises.
See the latest news headlines from The Argus:
- Albion players cleared of sexually assaulting a teenage girl
- Your say: Are the Greens fit to run Brighton and Hove City Council?
- Police plan anniversary visit to scene of Hove murder
- Albion players cleared at Old Bailey in sex assault trial
- Hove police station will be turned into a school
Add us to your circles on Google+
Comments(41)
Algeria Touchshriek
says...
7:35pm Mon 10 Dec 12
And get a wash.
mimseycal
says...
7:36pm Mon 10 Dec 12
Are we that insecure in these products of our education system that we cannot trust them to evaluate what they are shown/told critically?
Debate the view proffered by the film by any and all means. Demanding it not be shown because it runs contrary to the accepted view is tantamount to burning books because you don't approve of the theories they contain.
Algeria Touchshriek
says...
8:28pm Mon 10 Dec 12
Ahhhhhhhhhh, that'll be illegal because..........jus
t because eh?
leobrighton
says...
8:32pm Mon 10 Dec 12
leobrighton
says...
8:52pm Mon 10 Dec 12
mimseycal
says...
8:53pm Mon 10 Dec 12
Algeria Touchshriek wrote:A lot of the stuff taught in RE was ludicrous. Rising from the dead (Christianity) or Mannah from heaven (Judaism) being but two instances.
I was taught about Islam in RE. I didn't believe a word of it. What would happen if I started a protest?
Ahhhhhhhhhh, that'll be illegal because..........jus
t because eh?
Why fret about just one belief system you do not buy in to? And how relevant are your religious views to a film about HIV?
Algeria Touchshriek
says...
9:06pm Mon 10 Dec 12
If you read my response in relation to theirs, I am sure it will make sense.
mimseycal
says...
9:10pm Mon 10 Dec 12
leobrighton wrote:Actually ... education is about learning to evaluate and separate the wheat from the chaff. How can they learn to do that if all they are ever presented with is self raising flour?
These students have paid a lot of money to be educated properly yet they get this trash. I'd be after a refund if I were you. No wonder this country is on such a steep decline even education is seen as an opportunity to muck about and have a bit of a laugh and thats just the so called educators
The world is full of some really weird ideas. This film is just one example.
glklsm
says...
9:29pm Mon 10 Dec 12
this film does NOT undermine the message of safe sex , not at all. It only seeks to examine the science behind HIV.
unless you educate yourself you will always be a victim !
Learn to think for yourself
Alive & Kicking
says...
9:36pm Mon 10 Dec 12
Lady Smith
says...
9:50pm Mon 10 Dec 12
glklsm wrote:Let's hope you get enough education to learn how to spell 'tradegy' correctly, then...
AIDS is a tradegy BUT HIV is NOT the cause ...FACT!!!
this film does NOT undermine the message of safe sex , not at all. It only seeks to examine the science behind HIV.
unless you educate yourself you will always be a victim !
Learn to think for yourself
Alive & Kicking
says...
9:51pm Mon 10 Dec 12
glklsm wrote:Fact: Diagnosed with Aids 12 years ago
AIDS is a tradegy BUT HIV is NOT the cause ...FACT!!!
this film does NOT undermine the message of safe sex , not at all. It only seeks to examine the science behind HIV.
unless you educate yourself you will always be a victim !
Learn to think for yourself
Fact: Prognosis 2 years to live
Fact: Drugs raised CD4 to five times the level they were at when diagnosed
Fact: I live with HIV and its effects
Fact: You pass me in the street, on the bus or train and see me at work
Fact: I am alive, but have watched many die.
Don't die of ignorance or complacency and don't allow this kind denial or dissidence to disrespect the memory of those who've died.
I will not respond to this comment or be drawn any further.
mictrix
says...
10:43pm Mon 10 Dec 12
Alive & Kicking wrote:please refrain from making everyone vomit with this self pitying tripe,we're not INTERESTED.many thanks
glklsm wrote:Fact: Diagnosed with Aids 12 years ago
AIDS is a tradegy BUT HIV is NOT the cause ...FACT!!!
this film does NOT undermine the message of safe sex , not at all. It only seeks to examine the science behind HIV.
unless you educate yourself you will always be a victim !
Learn to think for yourself
Fact: Prognosis 2 years to live
Fact: Drugs raised CD4 to five times the level they were at when diagnosed
Fact: I live with HIV and its effects
Fact: You pass me in the street, on the bus or train and see me at work
Fact: I am alive, but have watched many die.
Don't die of ignorance or complacency and don't allow this kind denial or dissidence to disrespect the memory of those who've died.
I will not respond to this comment or be drawn any further.
mimseycal
says...
10:59pm Mon 10 Dec 12
glklsm wrote:HIV is a virus. AIDS is a medical condition.
AIDS is a tradegy BUT HIV is NOT the cause ...FACT!!!
this film does NOT undermine the message of safe sex , not at all. It only seeks to examine the science behind HIV.
unless you educate yourself you will always be a victim !
Learn to think for yourself
Angryoldman
says...
6:58am Tue 11 Dec 12
glklsm wrote:Keep taking the tablets.
AIDS is a tradegy BUT HIV is NOT the cause ...FACT!!!
this film does NOT undermine the message of safe sex , not at all. It only seeks to examine the science behind HIV.
unless you educate yourself you will always be a victim !
Learn to think for yourself
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
8:07am Tue 11 Dec 12
This is the college where its students cannot even remember which day to
put the rubbish out and why the council had to attach signs to lamposts to remind them and still they fail.
twosugars
says...
11:05am Tue 11 Dec 12
If early free thinkers had not questioned dogma, we would still be thinking that the earth is flat and the center of the universe, and anyone who said different would be burnt at the stake.
sarcher
says...
1:31pm Tue 11 Dec 12
StyleCop
says...
1:34pm Tue 11 Dec 12
twosugars wrote:Here Here - well said.
While i dont agree on Dr Cox's theories on Hiv and aids, is questioning current thinking on a subject such a bad thing? If early free thinkers had not questioned dogma, we would still be thinking that the earth is flat and the center of the universe, and anyone who said different would be burnt at the stake.
sarcher
says...
1:41pm Tue 11 Dec 12
sarcher
says...
2:06pm Tue 11 Dec 12
you only have to go to youtube and search..
RichardNY
says...
2:19pm Tue 11 Dec 12
http://www.facebook.
com/HouseOfNumbers/p
osts/530950683581636
?comment_id=6486717&
offset=0&total_comme
nts=8
RichardNY
says...
2:36pm Tue 11 Dec 12
nking AIDS"--that funded the film. Neither their shared membership of this organization or the organization's funding of the film is disclosed; instead the filmmakers lied, claiming it was an objective "documentary."
Indeed many of the denialist interviewees--includ
ing two HIV-positive individuals, Christine Maggiore and Kim Bannon, who have since died--were at the 2006 Rethinking AIDS board meeting where the decision to fund the film was made, the minutes are online: http://www.tig.org.z
a/Minutes_RA2006.htm
The funding is also listed in the Rethinking AIDS IRS 990 tax form for 2006, signed by Peter Duesberg's wife Siggi: http://www.guidestar
.org/FinDocuments//2
006/311/688/2006-311
688738-0314e401-F.pd
f
When the film came out, Rethinking AIDS issued a press release about it, full of their typical dishonesty:
http://www.rethinkin
gaids.com/Content/QA
/tabid/160/Default.a
spx
It says: "Leung, a Canadian film maker, created the film on his own and financed it from private sources"
Presumably they forgot that their IRS 990 forms are public information.
sussexram40
says...
3:46pm Tue 11 Dec 12
People with HIV today wh take their pills should live a normal lifespan I have read. This is part of the problem - because HIV is now a chronic treatable condition, a lt of peopel don't fear it like they did in the 80s when it was a death sentence. In fact some guys are quite relieved when they catch it because they can then stop worrying about catching it and do whatever they want in their sexual lives.
Tomás Brewster
says...
3:47pm Tue 11 Dec 12
Fact: Diagnosed with Aids 12 years ago
WRONG: There are currently over 13 diverse defintions for the CDC Syndrome "AID$". Look it up. There are no standard definitions globally. "AIDS"/"GRID" are phony medical cosntructs used to induce fear in human beings and sell toxic death pills.
Fact: Prognosis 2 years to live
WRONG: The typical prognosis in HIV/AIDS beliefism is patients have 5 to 8 years with or without toxic life-threatening drugs.
Fact: Drugs raised CD4 to five times the level they were at when diagnosed
WRONG: Antiretoviral drugs & AZT do not raise CD4 (T-Cells) they deplet them!
ARV's & AZT in the blood bring CD4's out of lymphoid tissues that were never counted and then flow cytometry is FDA approved bologna to begin with so CD4 counting is not a specific surrogate lab marker.
Fact: I live with HIV and its effects
WRONG: You live with the mindset or belief in what someone as verbally told you, since there are no defintiive tests that can tell if ANY human being is infected with the alleged retrovirus "HIV". No "HIV" test has ever been verified by means of direct HTLVIII/LAV isolation.
Fact: You pass me in the street, on the bus or train and see me at work
WRONG: Testimonials like yours contradict other's globally who have defied the most common assumptions about the alleged "HIV Theories of AIDS".
Fact: I am alive, but have watched many die.
PERHAPS: But so am I.
http://livingwithout
hivdrugs.com/tomasb.
htm
Don't die of ignorance or complacency and don't allow this kind denial or dissidence to disrespect the memory of those who've died.
WRONG: The infamous AID$ Quilt is the most iconic symbol of the global HIV/AID$ Holocaust.
I will not respond to this comment or be drawn any further.
Because The Church of HIV is full of denierists! and those who refuse to listen. Censorship equals murder.
sarcher
says...
4:30pm Tue 11 Dec 12
http://www.robertsco
ttbell.com/blog/ques
tioning-hiv-jon-rapp
oport-gmo-strategies
-monsanto-occupies-n
said-g-i-liver-dange
rs-preventing-cancer
-metastatis-greenhou
se-gas-drugs-more/
sarcher
says...
4:41pm Tue 11 Dec 12
http://tinyurl.com/b
alckh2
this link should work 12-2pm EST
OMSJ_CEO
says...
11:44pm Tue 11 Dec 12
Since Brighton's HIV researchers and activists are funded by the manufacturers of drugs and devices that are exposed in this documentary, it's not hard to understand why they are outraged by the video. If activists don't protest, they don't get candy from their pharmaceutical sugar daddies... Their outrage is a good reason why this award-winning documentary should be watched by the taxpayers who fund this scam.
PederKristiansen
says...
12:07am Wed 12 Dec 12
all AIDS-defining diseases can occur in HIV-negative people. They did so before the AIDS-era and continue to do so. They are simply called their old less dramatic names and have their own causes and treatments. So yes, it is also possible for people without "HIV" to develope what would otherwise be called AIDS in combination with a highly questionable "HIV-diagnosis."
In Africa the clinical definition model refered to as "The Bangui Clinical Definition of AIDS" has enabled physicians and healthcare workers to give people an AIDS-diagnosis without performing HIV-antibody tests but simply based on combinations of unspecific symptoms like weightlos, fever, diarrhoea etc.
In the United States HIV-positive people can be given an AIDS-diagnosis without the presence of any illness but based on a CD4 count under 200, which isn't a disease. In other words, it's possible to have AIDS without disease!
Vacunas Autismo
says...
11:46am Wed 12 Dec 12
Winnie Mwebe http://breakfornews.
com/aidsmyth/report/
articles/010520winni
emwebe.htm
In over 60% of cases of people in Africa who die of AIDS, Malaria is their AIDS-defining illness, because "AIDS" is a marketing tool not a disease or syndrome.
Vacunas Autismo
says...
11:48am Wed 12 Dec 12
The whole house of cards of HIV/AIDS theory has been built upon the outcomes of these dubious tests. If they fail the whole edifices crumbles... and they suck!
Clinicians grossly mistake consistency for accuracy. Having twenty tests give similar results doesn't imply accuracy at all, only consistency - which is a completely different animal.
Accuracy can only established by comparison against the actual demonstration of the viral particle in subjects with a positive test outcome and its absence in subjects with a negative outcome.
But this is not the way HIV tests are calibrated. Not by far!
From the disclosures of the CE approval requirements (see http://eur-lex.europ
a.eu/LexUriServ/LexU
riServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2
009:039:0034:0049:EN
:PDF pages L 39/40 to L 39/42) the positive and negative references used for hiv test calibration and licensing are based on assumptions and mutual comparisons. The calibration references used are these:
- Positive referents: Clinical AIDS patients. Negative outcomes in these referents are considered "false negative" and affect the specificity of the test.
Because there's no clinical differential diagnosis of AIDS without an HIV test, these referents are simply assumed to be infected. Alternatively, they have been diagnosed using a different HIV test which suffers from exactly the same lack of calibration against the actual virus as the test being licensed.
- Negative referents: Blood donors, pregnant women and other "low risk" persons. Positive outcomes in these are considered "false positives" and affect the sensitivity of the test.
These referents aren't controlled for the actual absence of HIV either, just assumed uninfected for being "low risk" (another axiom). This causes gross contradictions, such as a "positive" pregnant woman considered "false positive" in a panel setting, but the very same woman being "true positive" if tested in a clinical setting.
As a consequence, these tests might be detecting "feature X" with good consistency (they are panel-beaten agsinst each other), but still we have no clue on how close "feature X" is to "HIV". We can never know the accuracy because HIV is left out of the calibration process.
Too gross for words!
Vacunas Autismo
says...
11:52am Wed 12 Dec 12
These are produced by the patient, therefore strictly related to the patient, not to the virus.
The claim "related to HIV" is based on observing reactions between the suspected "HIV" antibody and proteins believed to characteristic of HIV. Such reactions obviously occur.
Now the claim "HIV antibodies" assumes specificity of the reaction. Specific? Excuse me, but there are at least 60 documented conditions, as common as the flu, pregnancy, herpes, carbohydrate antibodies etc. proven to induce antibodies reactive against "HIV antigens". There's a comprehensive referenced list here: http://www.ummafrapp
.de/skandal/felix/mi
tochond/Att.5.pdf
These antibodies are so abundant, that up to 35% of the "low risk" population carry at least one "specific HIV antibody" reactive to "HIV antigens". See http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/22302
70 and http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/75869
84
There's a reason for this: Antibodies and antigens have multiple epitopes, which provide for non-specific reactions (Example: http://www.cap.org/a
pps/docs/newspath/10
08/heterophilic_anti
body_interference.pd
f ). An antibody induced by antigen A can react with antigens B, C, D...N if there's any pair of matching epitopes. Therefore, claiming an antigen-antibody reaction as "strictly related" requires proof hat no other matching epitope exists in patients labelled as HIV-positive. Such proof-of-negative requires an impossible exhaustive search, so you'd be in the same position as a creationist asking for proof that god doesn't exist.
It's now apparent that the claim of "HIV antibodies" being a good surrogate of actual demonstration of the viral particle severely clashes with reality.
Vacunas Autismo
says...
11:54am Wed 12 Dec 12
It's claim they've been "isolated and sequenced from the virus". There are two inaccuracies in that claim:
a) In retrovirology "virus" is short for "virus isolate", which is what virologists work with.
b) "Sequenced from the virus" isn't correct either. Aminoacids are sequenced from the protein and then compared to a deduced amino acid sequence believed to be viral. See http://www.sciencema
g.org/content/229/47
20/1402.long
For lack of time I will just address the consequences of (a) in this reply.
== HIV isolates.==
A PUBMED search reveals they're grossly contaminated by human cell debris. This includes the ones in Gallo's seminal papers, on which he characterised proteins, genome subsequencies and patented his HIV test. The contamination problem is widely acknowledged, and the contamination is gross. For example:
Microvesicles are a source of contaminating cellular proteins found in purified HIV-1 preparations.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/91262
69
Notice the oxymoron: Contaminated "purified" HIV-1 preparations. This is rich!
Cell membrane vesicles are a major contaminant of gradient-enriched human immunodeficiency virus type-1 preparations.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/91262
68
Both papers concede that particles said to be HIV represent only a very small fraction of the total "HIV isolate" material. in plain English: Contamination is gross. The second paper states HIV-isolates contain "an excess of vesicles with a size range 50-500nm, as opposed to a minor population of virus particles...cellular vesicles appear...to be a major contaminant of HIV preparations enriched by sucrose gradient centrifugation".
Therefore, since the majority of the "HIV isolate" consists of cellular debris, proteins assumed to be "HIV" are most probability of human origin.
There's evidence of "HIV proteins" being actually human. They've been documented in human tissues of persons who are not infected by "HIV". For example, three of the main "HIV proteins" used extensively in HIV tests (p24, gp120 and p17) have been documented in healthy human placentas:
Expression of endogenous HIV-1 crossreactive antigens within normal human extravillous trophoblast cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/74734
33
"...we report that extravillous trophoblast (EVT) from second- and third-trimester tissue are also cross-reactive with anti-HIV-1 gp120/160 and p17/18 antibodies. We document a differential expression of such cross-reactive epitopes between mononuclear EVT and placental bed giant cells..."
HIV proteins in normal human placentae.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/19306
45
"...Cryostat sections of human normal term placentae were studied for evidence of immunopathology by using antibodies to lymphocytes, macrophages, platelets, and coagulation factors. ... Antigens gp120 and p17 were identified in normal chorionic villi in vimentin-positive fibroblast-like cells and in endothelium, respectively. Antigen p24 was localized to HLA-DR positive cells that morphologically resembled macrophages in areas of villitis..."
Notice that HIV/AIDS theory believes p24 and p17 to come from HIV's GAG gene, and gp120 from HIV's ENV gene. If your claim "proved to be virally encoded" were true, then how can human placentas possibly encode the same proteins? The non-human origin of HIV's genome is challenged by these findings.
Also, the lack of consensus regarding the molecular weight of "HIV proteins" falsifies your claim that they're well determined:
CAMBRIDGE BIOTECH HIV-1 WESTERN BLOT KIT
http://www.omsj.org/
tests/Cambridge%20Bi
otech%20HIV-1%20WB.p
df
"...Slight ambiguities exist in the designation of the molecular weights of the HIV-1 antigens..."
The disclaimer above gives 10 different references.
It is now apparent that so-called "HIV proteins", because they're ambiguous and found in non-infected persons cannot properly substitute actual demonstration of the viral particle. As a consequence, the calibration of HIV tests based on this surrogate can't possibly achieve sensitivity and or specificity.
Tomás Brewster
says...
2:41pm Wed 12 Dec 12
http://youtu.be/paqG
YSSwCug
Tomás Brewster
says...
2:44pm Wed 12 Dec 12
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=paqGYSSwC
ug&feature=youtu.be
bruce_
says...
11:50am Thu 13 Dec 12
sarcher
says...
10:58am Fri 14 Dec 12
bruce_ wrote:Bruce, why don't you watch the film rather then just say it sounds bizarre.
This film sounds bizarre -- but surely it's wrong to ban it?! Let it be shown in all its apparent foolishness and inaccuracy, and let people see this. No doubt a few potential/actual AIDS sufferers will believe its arguments; but mainly because they are looking for a reason to deny the facts, and would seize on anything.
RichardNY
says...
3:28pm Fri 14 Dec 12
"If they discover that HIV positive people have certain viruses, this still does not mean that they have discovered the true cause of AIDS, which is caused by a completely unhealthy and unnatural way of life."
http://www.naturalsc
ience.org/fileadmin/
portabledocuments/is
sueformer_interview_
en.pdf
You can see the affinity with Peter Duesberg, whose Rethinking AIDS organization funded House of Numbers: in the 80s Duesberg said AIDS is "caused by a lifestyle that was criminal twenty years ago."
NON HIV AIDS?
says...
7:20am Sun 16 Dec 12
Neenyah Ostrom's book "America's Biggest Cover-up: 50 More Things...CFS and Its Link To AIDS" cites as its # 1 thing: "Some CFS Patients May Be Non-HIV AIDS Cases."
NON HIV AIDS cases are cited in medical journals since 1992.
The reason we have no cure for AIDS is because HIV is NOT the cause.
My life w/ NON HIV AIDS: w ww.cfsstraighttalk.b
logspot.c om
or just google "NON HIV AIDS"
NON HIV AIDS?
says...
7:26am Sun 16 Dec 12
This marked it's 9 publication on 4 continents.
w w w.ukprogressive. c o .uk/the-aids-like-di
sease-seldom-mention
ed/article20891.h t m l
I recently testified on a federal level in Washington, DC too.
Maxwell's Ghost says...
7:19pm Mon 10 Dec 12