My Letter to the Guardian, “Serious Concerns over HIV Film”

Please contact the editor at the UK Guardian on their reportage:
email: or phone 020 7239 9857.

From: Liam Scheff to

Subject: Original investigator on “Flawed BBC Film” demands apology, correction

Dear Editor,

Please have your reporter, Leigh Holmwook, contact me, Liam Scheff, to correct the egregious errors in your reportage of the current attack on honest, critical, investigative journalism by the ‘AidsTruth’ pharma cabal. [Here]

Your reportage on this is missing more than half of the story. Your reporter Holmwood is quoting, at length, one Jeanne Bergman, activist for the drug use that is being criticized in the Guinea Pig Kids film.

You are citing the aggressor, not the aggrieved.

The issue at hand is the following – orphans in NYC were and are being used in clinical drug trials – “experiments” – with extraordinarily toxic drugs – as per the studies themselves.

Have a look at the title, the drugs, the warnings on every drug in the study, and the compound use of the drugs – seven at a time, in children as young as four years old.

What’s the complaint for? That the reporting was bad? It wasn’t. It was perfectly good, rigorous, courageous, truth-telling reporting.

So, what’s the complaint about?

Maybe the Jeanne Bergman’s in the world don’t like being associated with force-feeding drugs to children…

But your reporter left that out, and so did Bergman. These kids are force fed drugs through surgically-implanted tubes when they refuse drugs.

Why leave that juicy bit of reporting out? Aren’t you trying to sell papers?

Or, is it that that information just doesn’t fit with Bergman’s self-righteous tone in defense of the process.

It’s a shameful thing the BBC is doing, by capitulating to the demands of a pro-pharma cabal. It’s a shameful thing your journal is doing by not digging up the research that you say is flawed.

It’s not flawed, it’s solid as granite. Come have a look:

NIH/ICC Investigation
Awaiting your kind response,

Liam Scheff


2 thoughts on “My Letter to the Guardian, “Serious Concerns over HIV Film”

  1. To:

    I spent several years reading the original scientific literature about HIV and AIDS, and am thunderstruck at the disparity between the scientific evidence and what is disseminated from official sources and through the media. As to the antiretroviral drugs–the sort of thing tested on those orphans–, note the latest (October 2006) revision of the Fact Sheet of the National Institutes of Health:

    “the use of antiretroviral therapy is now associated with a series of serious side effects and long-term complications that may have a negative impact on mortality rates. More deaths occurring from liver failure,
    kidney disease, and cardiovascular complications are being observed in this patient population”

    There is no standard procedure for informing federal agencies of drug side-effects. It depends on observations and decisions by individual doctors, and the manufacturers do not always pass such information on in
    timely fashion–recall the case of Vioxx. The praised “cocktail” antiretroviral therapy now standard was introduced barely a decade ago.

    That officialdom has already decided that these toxicities are serious indicates that they are far from uncommon.

    Beyond that, much of what is repeated publicly is icorrect. The data from HIV tests in official reports and in the peer-reviewed literature show clearly that the mainstream reiteration that HIV and AIDS are correlated
    is simply untrue. They are NOT correlated geographically, chronologically, or in their differential impacts on men and on women, and on black and on white Americans. Full citations of the literature are in my recently published book, see

    The incessant repetition of “spreading epidemics” is also contrary to the facts. For example, yesterday,

    “Catholic condom ban helping AIDS spread in Latam: U.N. – Yahoo! News

    The article says, “The rapid spread in Latin America of the virus that causes AIDS”

    But here are the official numbers from the reports issued by UNAIDS:

    Latin America 1997: 0.5%
    2003: 0.6%
    2005: 0.55%”

    It is past time that the mass media did some proper investigative reporting about the facts about HIV and AIDS.

    As to the protest about the BBC documentary, it came from a small group of self-appointed vigilantes whose credentials for commenting about HIV and AIDS are less than impressive. Their “AIDStruth” website was set up by a dozen people who include a graduate student (Ken Witwer), a professor of economics (Nicoli Nattrass), several “HIV/AIDS activists” with no technical credentials (Martin Delaney, Nathan Geffen, Gregg Gonsalves, Richard Jefferys), and a PhD in a non-scientific discipline (Jeanne Bergman).

    Yet these people have the gall to say that Kary Mullis, Nobelist for PCR invention, and Peter Duesberg, leading retrovirologist and member of the Nationla Academy of Sciences, aren’t qualified to talk about HIV/AIDS
    because they’ve never done research on it!

    Please, please, look beyond the standard propaganda and contemplate the published scientific evidence. Note that James Chin, former epidemiologist for the World Health Organization, has recently published “The AIDS Pandemic” which calls all the numbers disseminated by UNAIDS bogus.

    Henry H. Bauer

    Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Scientific Exploration

    Dean Emeritus of Arts & Sciences,
    Professor Emeritus of Chemistry & Science Studies,
    Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s