Item #53: HIV and Holocaust ‘Denialism’

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 that the Nazis slaughtered 6 million Jews.

Farber criticises those who compare AIDS denialism to Holocaust denialism.

Analogous to holocaust denialism, AIDS denialism is an insult to the memory of those who have died of AIDS, as well as to the dignity of their families, friends and survivors. As with Holocaust denialism, AIDS denialism is pseudo-scientific and contradicts an immense body of research. But in contrast to Holocaust denialism, AIDS denialism directly threatens lives today by trying to fool laypeople at risk of HIV not to get tested for the virus or not to practice safer sex. It also tries to fool those who need ARVs not to take them.

There is no such creature as “AIDS denialism”. While some dissidents or rethinkers question the validity of HIV tests or the causes of illness and death, they have never denied that people have died of the many conditions described as AIDS. The comparison to Holocaust denial is a cheap shot meant to stir an immediate, emotive and uncritical response. It is not an insult to the memories of those who died of AIDS to ask whether those deaths were actually caused by AZT and other treatments. It is an insult to those currently diagnosed HIV positive to deny them access to the ongoing scientific debate.

The AIDS rethinkers or ‘dissidents’ have never attempted to fool anybody nor have they encouraged people to give up safer sex. Dissidents have worked to educate people on the real risks of STDs, prescription drugs and recreational drugs. They have provided factual information on the tests and anti-retroviral (’AIDS’) drugs hidden by the orthodoxy. It is the right of any person who takes an HIV test or is diagnosed as HIV positive to have access to all relevant information. The orthodoxy has denied people access to the education necessary to give informed consent on tests and treatments.

The dissident critique is not “pseudo-scientific” but rather a scientific critique largely based on the "immense body of research" carried out by the orthodoxy, as is evident by reading websites such as aras.ab.ca, aliveandwell.org, theperthgroup.com and virusmyth.net.