SERGE LANG

Questions have also arisen about AIDS being transmitted to hemophiliacs via blood transfusions.

I am not here concerned with intent, but with scientific standards, especially the ability to tell the difference between a fact, an opinion, a hypothesis, and a hole in the ground.

Roughly speaking, this hypothesis asks whether drug use causes some of the diseases officially associated with AIDS, such as immunodeficiency and Kaposi's sarcoma.

Aside from all that, we recall that antibodies to malaria and other diseases prevalent in Africa show up as HIV-positive on tests.

Of course, there are diseases of which people die.

The power structure does what they want, when they want; then they try to find reasons to justify it

To an extent that undermines classical standards of science, some purported scientific results concerning 'HIV' and 'AIDS' have been handled by press releases, by disinformation, by low-quality studies, and by some suppression of information, manipulating the media and people at large. When the official scientific press does not report correctly, or obstructs views dissenting from those of the scientific establishment, it loses credibility and leaves no alternative but to find information elsewhere.

Questions have arisen about the policing of science. Who is responsible for the policing? My answer is: all of us.

I object to a legal approach when settling questions of science or scientific behavior.

There exist thousands of Americans who have AIDS-defining diseases but are HIV negative.

Questions have also arisen about AIDS being transmitted to hemophiliacs via blood transfusions.

To address questions of scientific responsibility does not necessarily imply that one needs technical competence in a particular field (e.g. biology) to evaluate certain technical matters.

They cannot count on the press and they cannot count on Congressional committees to bring the problems of the scientific community to their own attention, or to police the scientific community.

Of course, there are diseases of which people die.

Questions have arisen about the policing of science. Who is responsible for the policing? My answer is: all of us.

If Baltimore's view, that scientists who do not take the words of authorities are far removed from the ordinary behavior of scientists, prevails in the scientific community, then something fundamental, very serious, and very disturbing is happening to the scientific community.

There exist thousands of Americans who have AIDS-defining diseases but are HIV negative.

Originally, in the early eighties, the drug hypothesis was among the first which occurred to scientists.

What standards are upheld by the scientific community affect the community internally, and also affect its relations with society at large, including Congress.

I object to a legal approach when settling questions of science or scientific behavior.

Roughly speaking, this hypothesis asks whether drug use causes some of the diseases officially associated with AIDS, such as immunodeficiency and Kaposi's sarcoma.

Aside from all that, we recall that antibodies to malaria and other diseases prevalent in Africa show up as HIV-positive on tests.

I am not here concerned with intent, but with scientific standards, especially the ability to tell the difference between a fact, an opinion, a hypothesis, and a hole in the ground.

Of course, screening for HIV did essentially eliminate the transmission of this virus by transfusions.

Pseudoscience and nonsense …

The power structure does what they want, when they want; then they try to find reasons to justify it

To an extent that undermines classical standards of science, some purported scientific results concerning 'HIV' and 'AIDS' have been handled by press releases, by disinformation, by low-quality studies, and by some suppression of information, manipulating the media and people at large. When the official scientific press does not report correctly, or obstructs views dissenting from those of the scientific establishment, it loses credibility and leaves no alternative but to find information elsewhere.

Axiomatization is what one does last, it's rubbish. It's the hygiene of mathematics, axiomatization.

The problems of financing the universities and their intellectual freedom, threatened by political and bureaucratic interference, are problems which are invariant under the ism transformations: socialism, communism, capitalism, or any other ism or ology.