This section is from the "Health and Survival in the 21st Century" book, by Ross Horne.
Science by Press Release
Within the space of one month several news reports about the AZT trials appeared in Australian newspapers, headlined as follows:
"EARLY AZT DOSES HALVE AIDS CASES"
(The Australian, 4 February 1992)
"AZT NO SURVIVAL BENEFIT TO AIDS"
(The Courier Mail, 14 February 1992)
"AIDS WONDER DRUG* FAILS TO PROLONG LIFE OF
(The Australian, 2 March 1992)
*The license to call drugs "wonder drugs" is apparently a journalistic one, the product of a wild imagination.
What Burroughs Wellcome and the FDA want everybody to believe from the first report is that even though AZT is destructive to the immune system, it is at the same time capable of slowing such destruction by its effect of arresting HIV activity if it is used early enough. In regard to the other reports, the AIDS establishment says that AZT treatment should have been started earlier, but nevertheless while lives were not prolonged, the patients were spared the worst symptoms before their final decline. So goes the old saying: "The operation was a success, but unfortunately the patient died." Cancer never gets a mention.
The realistic viewpoint of these reports is completely different. The Duesberg/Roote-Bernstein viewpoint is that the toxic effects of AZT given to symptom-free HIV-positive subjects actually assists the development of AIDS in many of them, and that the 50% who reportedly escaped did so because their constitutions were strong enough to combat the AZT toxicity. In other words they escaped, not because of AZT, but in spite of it. In relation to the reports about no survival benefit, the same argument applies, which is that many of the patients that perished would not have done so at all had they not been brainwashed (along with their doctors) to expect death, and then assisted to die by AZT poisoning.
Such discrepancies in the interpretation of observed phenomena need not imply conscious criminal intent by one party or another. More likely it demonstrates Dr William Roe's observations quoted in Chapter 6 which en&.
"Indeed it seems the most destructive (and perhaps the most dangerous) characteristic of that species of the genus Homo we conceitedly label Sapiens is not his wisdom but his reluctance to admit ignorance.
Rather than do so, he is prone to posit an hypothesis and, all too frequently in the absence of supporting evidence, comes to believe it. Thus are myths created."
Which is myth and which is fact in the argument on AIDS? If the reader is in doubt, perhaps the following chapter may assist in resolving it.