Local Storage seems to be disabled in your browser.
For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Local Storage in your browser.
Debunking the debunkers – Nathan Geffen and the TAC
Jul 22, 2010
Nathan Geffen, a leading activist in the TAC (Treatment Action Campaign) has recently published his book "debunking delusions - the inside story of the TAC". It is intended as a celebration of AIDS orthodoxy's final victory over AIDS denialism in South Africa, the victory of "science based medicine" over "Quack-ism". But is all well in the camp of the advocates of Antiretrovirals? Do they have any scientific basis for their allegations of ARVs being "life prolonging drugs"?
"My body is a machine"
To fully understand the mentality behind the outgoing mechanistic paradigm one should savour this introductory statement by Geffen:"Most of us understand little about how to treat our ilnesses. we also do not know how to repair our cars when they break down... ...We depend on health providers to make us better and often have, at best, a slight understanding of how our doctor, nurse or traditional or alternative healer does this." (p 5/6)
This is how the generation of my parents and granparents were programmed to think of their body and health. They accept it as normal to end their lives in a succession of surgical operations, losing a lung here, a quarter of a stomach there, then a gland here and a limb there. Like a car electrician would take out the sophisticated circuitry of a once well appointed car as it gets older. - until the lights go out!
My optometrist, otherwise a witty and quite entertaining guy, paraphrased this worldview a few years ago with the following sentence: "My body is a bag of chemicals with skin around"
Well, I'm sorry mine is not!
But before my sermon gets mistaken for another New-Agey critique of a soul-less but otherwise well functioning medical philosophy, I want to ask the question if the mechanic actually gets the car fixed. (to stay in the metaphor) As we will see there is very little evidence for that. There is a lot more evidence (however carefully surpressed) that the quacks against whom he rants so ferouciously do get the car fixed most of the time with a predictable and significant rate of success.
What's all the hubbub about?
South Africa has been targeted to be the exemplary country for AIDS, Antiretroviral rollout and the whole multibillion Dollar circus of mass poisoning. A huge genocidal experiment in population reduction and social engineering. When our then president Thabo Mbeki started questioning some of the basic assumptions of ruling AIDS science, such as the causation of the loosely defined "immune deficiency syndrome" by the HIV virus, the efficiency of highly toxic ARVs in combating this allegedly new disease, he was subjected to an intense and spiteful barrage of concerted media attacks. This is actually when I became interseted in the debate. The ferocity and anger behind the attacks on Mbeki was suspicious from the beginning. In fact this started to become a regular feature in the "Mail and Guardian" , the major liberal weekly newspaper in South Africa. At least 1 broadside and 2-3 little stings against Mbeki per issue since he asked for an independent mixed panel of scientists to debate AIDS science during the famous Durban AIDS conference in 2000.
The panel was sabotaged from the beginning by the mainstream scientists who found it beyond their dignity to ever debate on level par with dissidents in the scientific community. Dr. Sam Mhlongo died in a very unlikely car accident with "a runaway truck that could never be found", Manto is dead, Tina v/d Mass is destitute after 8-9 well targeted (always at her notes and means of survival) robberies "with aggravating circumstances", Dr. Rath has left the country and nobody talks about dissident views in the accessible public domain any more. (not that they ever had much of a forum in mainstream media) I think very few people in the world really know what Tina v/d Mass has done, what phenomenal healing successes she has achieved and why for a few years a whole government was publicly, albeit not very efficiently, backing the "Lemon, Olive Oil, Garlic and Beetroot Quackery" of one Tina v/d Maas.
Science based medicine
is one of Geffen's most favourite catch words. He constantly insinnuates that the antiretroviral peddling orthodoxy has the science to show for it, but is that so?
Do yourself a favour and phone the head of the HIV unit at the biggest hospital in the southern Hemisphere, Soweto's Baragwanath Hospital. Ask someone reasonably high up in the pecking order if they have any follow up on survival of Antiretroviral patients. You will be shocked.
Another funny game you can play is: Ask your sharp young doctor friend to quote the seminal article that prves that "HIV causes AIDS". You'll be amazed. Not even Luc Montagneir believes that any more.
However the propaganda machine does not need scientific proof. The onus of proof is only laid upon those who beg to disagree.
It's a study case for public opinion control by blatant censorship and supression of truth.