New Videos






for critical german comments, please click here

aids critics books from

Critical Views about Dr. Robert C. Gallo







Critical Opinions about Dr. Robert Charles Gallo (The Aids Inventer)

On April 23, 1984 Dr. Robert Gallo of the National Institutes of Health announced that he had discovered "the probable cause of AIDS", a new retrovirus later named HIV.

(1) Gallo's statement was made at an international press conference, circumventing essential rules of the scientific process: No research study providing evidence for his claim about HIV had been published for review in any scientific or medical journal. By the following day, the New York Times had turned Gallo's unsubstantiated statement into a certainty with front page reports on "the AIDS virus", bringing all funding and research for non-viral causes of AIDS to an abrupt halt.

(2) When the evidence Gallo offered for his statement was published several weeks later, this paper revealed that he was unable to find the HIV virus in more than half of the AIDS patients he had studied.

(3) While he was able to detect antibodies in most, antibodies do not cause or predict disease and are an indication of immunity. A congressional investigation later determined that Gallo had not discovered HIV. The virus he claimed to have found had actually been taken from a sample sent to him by a French virologist, Luc Montagnier.

(4) At the 1993 International AIDS Conference, Dr. Montagnier stated that "HIV may be benign."

(5) The high correlation that appears to exist between HIV and AIDS is not proof of causation, but rather an artifact of the AIDS definition. AIDS is defined as any one of 29 old diseases

(such as pneumonia, yeast infection, TB, cancer, diarrhea, and salmonella) that occur in a person who has also registered positive on an HIV antibody test. These diseases are called AIDS only when they occur in people who test HIV antibody positive. All these diseases can be found in people who test HIV negative. There are no diseases exclusive to AIDS, and AIDS itself is not a disease.

(6) The Formula for AIDS:

       Pneumonia + HIV Antibodies = AIDS
       Pneumonia no HIV Antibodies = Pneumonia
       Diarrhea + HIV Antibodies = AIDS
       Diarrhea no HIV Antibodies = Diarrhea

“Like most of our present AIDS experts, Gallo came from a group of government cancer virologists who had spent almost two decades and over $20 billion seeking proof for the theory that cancer is caused by a contagious, sexually transmitted virus. Since retroviruses do not kill cells and cancer is a condition marked by rapid cell growth, this type of virus seemed a likely candidate for a cancer virus. But 20 years of research devoted to retroviruses failed to produce proof for the concept of contagious, sexually transmitted cancer.  source...


By Philip J. Hilts / New York Times 31 Dec. 1992

After three years of investigations, the Federal Office of Research Integrity today found that Dr. Robert C. Gallo, the American co-discoverer of the cause of AIDS, had committed scientific misconduct. The investigators said he had "falsely reported" a critical fact in the scientific paper of 1984 in which he described isolating the virus that causes AIDS.

The new report said Dr. Gallo had intentionally misled colleagues to gain credit for himself and diminish credit due to his French competitors. The report also said that his false statement had "impeded potential AIDS research progress" by diverting scientists from potentially fruitful work with the French researchers.

Dr. Gallo has faced questions about his scientific claims ever since the paper was published in Science magazine in April 1984. Most of his critics argued that Dr. Gallo had tried to take credit for work that the French had done and that he may even have taken the virus the French were studying and claimed it as his own. At the time, the virus was difficult to isolate and grow in sufficient quantity for researchers.

Also charged with the misconduct was Dr. Mikulas Popovic, a Czechoslovak immigrant who actually carried out the crucial AIDS experiments under Dr. Gallo.

Maintains Innocence

Dr. Gallo said today that he was not guilty and would appeal the decision. "After reviewing everything I and my colleagues have ever published on the discovery of the AIDS virus and the development of the AIDS blood test, the office of Research Integrity could only take issue with few trivial mistakes and a single sentence written by me."

The Federal conclusions are "utterly unwarranted," he said. "On a broader level," he added, "this endless and incompetent Government investigation should be of concern to everybody seeking to advance medical knowledge. My laboratory's contributions to the advancement of medical science are undisputed. For the past three years, however, I have spent a substantial amount of my time responding to issues" raised in the investigations.

The Office of Research Integrity was created this year in the Department of Health and Human Services to handle the final review of scientific misconduct cases within agencies like the National Institute of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The only remaining step for Dr. Gallo is to appeal the case to a judicial board within the department.

Little Credit for French

The report said Dr. Gallo intentionally misled scientific colleagues by saying he had grown an AIDS virus in his laboratory for study and he had not grown or studied a similar French strain of the virus. In fact, Dr. Gallo himself had grown the French virus and used it in furthering his own research, the report said.

While searching for the cause of AIDS, Dr. Gallo had received a sample of a virus being studied by French researchers and had worked extensively with it to extend his own discoveries, the Federal report concluded. Dr. Gallo left little credit for the French scientists in his 1984 paper because he said he had not been able to grow enough of the French AIDS virus: It "has not been transmitted to a permanently growing cell line for true isolation and therefore has been difficult to obtain in quantity," he wrote.

Dr. Gallo has said that this sentence meant simply that the virus was hard for anyone to grow it, not that he himself had failed to grow it. In fact, investigators showed that the French virus had been grown in cell lines in Dr. Gallo's own laboratory, and worked with there.

Referring to the sentence, the new report said, "Dr. Gallo falsely reported the status of L.A.V. research when he wrote the statement, and this constitutes scientific misconduct." L.A.V. refers to the French strain of the AIDS virus. The report went on, "The explanations that Dr. Gallo proffered for the statement are neither credible when the evidence is considered, nor do they vitiate the impropriety of falsely reporting the status of L.A.V. research.

In addition, the report found that Dr. Gallo warranted censure on these four other counts:

* Referring to his role as a referee for a different article submitted to a journal by his French competitors, in which he altered several lines to favor his own hypothesis about the AIDS virus, the report said the revisions were "gratuitous, self-serving and improper."

* As to the many errors in the 1984 paper, which was co-authored with Dr. Popovic, the report concluded, "In light of his role as senior author, Dr. Gallo must bear substantial responsibility for the numerous discrepancies, including four instances of scientific misconduct attributed to Dr. Popovic."

* On the standards of Dr. Gallo's laboratory record-keeping, the report said, "Especially in the light of the ground-breaking nature of this research and its profound public health implications, O.R.I. believes that the careless and unacceptable keeping of research records reflects irresponsible laboratory management that has permanently impaired the ability to trace the important steps taken."

* Dr. Gallo, the report said, also failed to determine in a timely way the exact origin of some of the crucial cells in which he grew the finicky virus. Like the viruses themselves, the cells were also found to have been borrowed from another scientist without giving him due credit in the paper. Later Dr. Gallo also refused to share the cells freely with other scientists trying to duplicate the important work, the report said.

Inquiries Begun in 1989

The dispute over Dr. Gallo's claims became so linked to national scientific prestige that the Presidents of France and the United States attempted to end the conflict in 1987 when they agreed to a 50-50 split of credit and patent royalties from work with the AIDS virus and the blood test to detect it.

But the issue did not go away, and Federal investigations were begun in 1989, after a reporter, John Crewdson, of the Chicago Tribune wrote a 50,000-word article laying out many of the charges against Dr. Gallo and his laboratory.

An initial Federal inquiry was conducted by the Office of Scientific Integrity at the Institutes of Health. That office examined all of the notes from Dr. Gallo's laboratory on the AIDS research and interviewed scores of people involved in the work. That office's report was turned over to the Office of Research Integrity.

Dr. Gallo has denied any wrongdoing in the most vehement terms. He has also alleged that there is a conspiracy to discredit him and asked why it is only his laboratory being investigated, and not that of Dr. Luc Montagnier, the French laboratory leader who has largely escaped detailed scrutiny.

What's at Stake

In the great public health catastrophe of AIDS, the story of how the virus that causes AIDS was isolated and a test for the presence developed might be of only historical interest were it not for the fierce and unyielding pride of the researchers and the millions of dollars the two Governments receive annually in royalties from the manufacturers of the blood tests.

In a recent plea to the American Government, lawyers for the Institut Pasteur in Paris, where the French work was done, asked the United States to turn over half of the profits from the blood test - about $50 million since 1985.

Dr. Gallo earns about $100,000 a year from the royalties on the blood test, as does his French counterpart, Dr. Montagnier.

Michael Epstein, a lawyer for the Institut Pasteur, said in a telephone interview today that in light of today's report the French would ask the United States to renegotiate its agreement giving equal credit to each country, so as to assign a larger share to France.

"this ought to move the U.S. Government to action," he said. "Dr. Gallo has always told us that he was never able to grow L.A.V. One of the most important reasons why Pasteur settled the dispute in 1987 was that Dr. Gallo told us that and said there was no evidence to the contrary. Now even the U.S. Government is saying that he knowingly lied."

The new report reversed the findings by Dr. Bernadine Healy, director of the National Institute of Health and Dr. Gallo's superior. After receiving the report from the Office of Scientific Integrity, she concluded in September 1991 that Dr. Gallo did a number of things wrong but was not guilty of the most serious charge, that of scientific misconduct.

Investigators at National Institutes of Health and in Congress disagreed, as did a panel of independent scientists.   

Years of Scientific Dispute

1983 French scientist under Luc Montagnier at Pasteur Institute report discovery of a virus that might be the cause of AIDS.

1984 Ignoring French claim, U.S. scientists at National Institutes of Health under Dr. Robert C. Gallo announce discovery of such a virus and proof that it causes AIDS.

1985 A blood test for antibodies to the AIDS virus is licensed. The French sue the U.S. Government over the credit for the discovery of the virus.

1987 President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Jacques Chirac announce an agreement on sharing credit and divide royalties for the blood test.

1989 A Chicago Tribune article suggests that Dr. Gallo improperly took credit for the Montagnier discovery.

MARCH 1990 A Tribune report asserts that Dr. Gallo's virus was probably identical to the Pasteur Institute virus.

OCTOBER 1990 the National Institute of Health says it will open a full-scale investigation of the matter by the Office of Scientific Integrity because a preliminary investigation suggested the possibility of misconduct.

MAY 1991 Dr. Gallo formally concedes that the viral cultures were probably contaminated by the French samples but maintains that he is a co-discoverer.

SEPTEMBER 1991: Preliminary report by Office of Scientific Integrity finds evidence of misconduct by Dr. Gallo. Final report holds that he is not guilty of misconduct but deserves censure for permitting lapses and misrepresentations by those under him.

MARCH 1992 New investigation of charges of perjury and patent fraud announced by Inspector General of Department of Health and Human Services, the General Accounting Office and a house subcommittee.

DEC. 30 1992 Report of Office of Research Integrity of Department of Health and Human Services says Dr. Gallo grew a sample of Montagnier's virus in his own laboratory, misled colleagues to gain credit for himself.   source...

Q: What about Dr Gallo's contention that HIV is a slow 'mysterious' and 'intelligent' virus?

A: Dr Duesberg renowned as one of, if not the world's foremost retrovirologists, answers that question by saying that: "'Slow' or 'lente' viruses do not exist. It is another hypothetical invention designed to explain what is obviously nonsense. It has no basis in fact, no precedent in science, and is contradictory to 20 years of research findings (and I might add billions of dollars in funding). Retroviruses can only be replicated by the host cell, and are dependent on the life-cycle of that cell. Therefore, the virus must replicate within hours or days in order to survive. For over 20 years an exhaustive investigation of retoviruses reveals that there is no such thing as a 'slow virus'" There is nothing biochemically or genetically different about HIV that would give it the power to act any differently than any other retrovirus. As Dr. Duesberg so aptly puts it "There are no slow viruses, only slow virologists."

Q: Did you always know HIV was not the true cause of AIDS?

A: No. I have to admit that in the beginning I too believed Gallo's big lie. But the more I learned about retroviruses the more the AIDS hypothesis didn't make sense.” 

The role of Robert Gallo in the origin of Aids


By Kwame Ingemar The human factor - attempts of disinformation.

Robert Gallo could well be called The Dr Jekyll and Mr AIDS of the epidemic.
Robert Charles Gallo was born in March 1937. His paternal grandparents had immigrated from Turin in Italy and his father was a self-made men. He had started his career as a welder and ended up as a director within a small but successful metal workshop. Robert would inherit the properties of capacity and workaholism from his father, and he resembled his mother, who originated from southern Italy, in her carismatic, extrovert, warm lifestyle. He grew up in Waterford, Connecticut on the American east-coast. A turning point in his childhood was when his younger sister Judith contracted leukaemia. At the visits at the hospital bed Robert came in close contact with the science people who fought to save lives of sick children. This triggered in Bob an interest for biology.

Althouh his sister's death helped Robert in his descision to become a scientist his results in school just reached the average. He spent more time playing basketball and chasing girls than on his homework. But an accident on the basketball court, where he broke his back, confined him to bed for almost a year. This gave him chance to read everything he came over about biology and where he developed his skills in natural sciences. During his college years he slew scores of mice in the makeshift laboratory above his mother's garage developing skills in surgery. Gallo's determination to concentrate on research grew after his first assignment at an acute ward for children with leukaemia. From then he decided not to work with patients anymore.

At the age of 29 he started his research at the NCI. and pointed straight upwards. In 1972, six years after he started of his career, he was appointed director of the NCI. But already in 1970 he had been interested in retroviruses and especially those viruses that hypotetically could create cancer and leukaemia.

A thorough unbiased investigation into Robert Gallo's proceedings will also give rise to the following "The Greater AIDS Quest", but are they ever to be answered?:

1) To lie, to disinform, to mislead, to blame others and to threat was distinctive features of Robert Gallo since 1975. Was it a way he used to safer reach his goal of winning a Nobel Prize or is there a more profound back ground to his behaviour?

2) The most natural thing and easiest to do to trace the origin of AIDS had been for Gallo, Essex and the NCI to investigate and publish evaluations of the enormous material of bloodsamples collected in connection with the Hepatitis-B-vaccine programme that was performed on young, healthy, mainly white homosexual men in 1978 in New York, 1980 in San Francisco and shortly thereafter in Los Angeles, Denver, S:t Louis and Chicago. Why is Gallo mentioning this coincidence in the outbreak of the AIDS epidemic?

3) Why were Gallo and Essex with such frenzy searching for retroviruses in monkeys and remote African villages, using unscientific means and fraudelent behaviour? At the same time they avoided to search for potential ancestors of HIV in the retroviruses they themselves used in their earlier experimentations. Why this reluctance in finding the origin of AIDS?

4) Gallo and Gillespie published a report already in 1975, where it is evident that they succeeded in hybridizing the human virus HL-23 V with other animal retroviruses. Why isn't it allowed to openly discuss these hybrides as a possible artificial source, not only for HIV but for all newly discovered retroviruses in monkeys and other animals?

5) By all Gallo's "enemies" , Luc Montagnier or even better Francoise BarrŽ and Jean-Claude Chermann are considered as the true discoverers of HIV. But can't it still be true that the first in the world to discover the AIDS virus was Robert Gallo, sometime around 1977, when he noticed in the laboratory a new virus was emerging from a cell culture injected with other viruses? If that is the case, wouldn't Gallo be honored as the first in the world, not as the discoverer, but as the inventor of a human lentivirus?   



Staff Report
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
Committee on Energy and Commerce

This massive inquiry by investigators for Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) was buried when chairmanship of the U.S. Congress House subcommittee that oversees the National Institute of Health (NIH) went from Democrat to Republican control in early 1995. According to the draft report of this three-year investigation by Dingell's staff there was a "continuing coverup" by successive U.S. administrations of scientific misconduct ("fraud") by Gallo and other American scientists in the "discovery" of the "AIDS virus" and the invention of the "AIDS test". The bottom line is Gallo admits he had not isolated HTLV IIIb (HIV) the "probable cause of AIDS" at the time he conducted his seminal experiments. Instead, he used Montagnier's LAV (or LAI) "isolates" to conduct his experiments and develop the HIV antibody test which became the subject of the international patent dispute. Despite assurances by the Dingell investigators that Gallo eventually did isolate and grow HIV, there is plenty of evidence that HIV has never been isolated. Luc Montagnier (Inst. Pasteur, France) has admitted this in a 1997 interview with Djamel Tahi: "Of course one looked for it... We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology typical of retroviruses." Two groups of researchers have shown that so-called "HIV isolates" used to this day by reseachers are actually almost entirely cellular debris (go here for a discussion of their Virology papers). For an exhaustive overview of the problem see: The Isolation of HIV; Has It Really Been Achieved? by Papadopulos-Eleopulos et al.  


It's An Open Question

By Charles A. Thomas Jr., Kary B. Mullis, & Phillip E. Johnson

Reason June 1994

Most people believe they know what causes AIDS. For a decade, scientist, government officials, physicians, journalists, public-service ads, TV shows, and movies have told them that AIDS is caused by a retrovirus called HIV. This virus supposedly infects and kills the "T-cells" of the immune system, leading to an inevitably, fatal immune deficiency after an asymptomatic period that averages 10 years or so. Most people do not know-because there has been a visual media blackout on the subject-about a longstanding scientific controversy over the cause of AIDS. A controversy that has become increasingly heated as the official theory's predictions have turned out to be wrong.

Leading biochemical scientists, including University of California at Berkeley retrovirus expert Peter Duesberg and Nobel Prize winner Walter Gilbert, have been warning for years that there is no proof that HIV causes AIDS. The warnings were met first with silence, then with ridicule and contempt. In 1990, for example, Nature published a rare response from the HIV establishment, as represented by Robin A. Weiss of the Institute of Cancer Research in London and Harold W. Jaffe of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Weiss and Jaffe compared the doubters to people who think that bad air causes malaria. "We have . . . been told," they wrote, "that the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) originates from outer space, or as a genetically engineered virus for germ warfare which was tested in prisoners and spread from them. Peter H. Duesberg's proposition that HIV is not the cause of AIDS at all is, to our minds, equally absurd." Viewers of ABC's 1993 Day One special on the cause of AIDS-almost the only occasion on which network television has covered the controversy-saw Robert Gallo, the leading exponent of the HIV theory, stomp away from the microphone in a rage when asked to respond to the views of Gilbert and Duesberg.  

Gallo critices Luc Montagnier ???

“Before these facts were well understood, Robert Gallo and his followers insisted that the virus does its damage by directly infecting and killing cells. In his 1991 autobiography, Gallo ridiculed HIV discoverer Luc Montagnier's view that the virus causes AIDS only in the company of as yet undiscovered "cofactors." Gallo argued that "multifactorial is multi-ignorance" and that, because being infected by HIV was "like being hit by a truck," there was no need to look for additional causes or indirect mechanisms of causation.”  source...

The AIDS Debate

The Most Controversial Story You've Never Heard by Liam Scheff


In 1984, Robert Gallo, a government cancer-virologist, called an international press conference to announce that he'd found the probable cause of AIDS. He claimed that a retrovirus called HIV was destroying the immune systems of young gay men and IV drug abusers, leaving them open to a variety of both viral diseases and cancer.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, AIDS is not a single disease, but rather a category of 29 unrelated, previously-known conditions including herpes, yeast infections, salmonella, diarrhea, fever, flus, TB, pelvic cancer in women, pneumonia and bacterial infections. The CDC also designates HIV- positive people who aren't sick, but have a T-cell count below 200, as AIDS patients (T-cells are a subset of white blood cells). The only thing that separates an AIDS diagnosis from any of these conditions is a positive HIV test, which itself is based on Robert Gallo's research.

Gallo's HIV theory, however, was not the only AIDS theory, and according to a growing number of concerned scientists, researchers and activists, it wasn't the best. For 70 years before Gallo, retroviruses were known to be a non-toxic part of the cell; moreover, no single virus could simultaneously cause a viral disease like pneumonia, in which cells are destroyed, and a cancer like Kaposi's Sarcoma, in which cells multiply rapidly.

These scientists argue that Gallo's unified HIV/AIDS theory is flawed and that treating 29 unrelated diseases with extremely toxic AIDS drugs like AZT and protease inhibitors is at best irresponsible and at worse medical genocide.

They may have a point. Ninety-four percent of all AIDS-related deaths in the US occurred after the introduction of AZT, according to CDC statistics through the year 2000. And according to the University of Pittsburgh, the No. 1 cause of death in US AIDS patients today is liver failure, a side-effect of the new protease inhibitors.

The questions arise: Did Gallo truly solve the AIDS riddle, and are we treating AIDS humanely and effectively?

To answer these questions, I spoke with three prominent AIDS researchers. 


Gallo critics say tests of drug may be invalid

By John Crewdson / Chicago Tribune 9 June 1994

A major medical journal has taken the highly unusual step of publishing an article questioning the veracity of research appearing in a rival journal, raising tempers as well as new questions about what had appeared to be one of the few hopeful developments regarding AIDS.

The article, published in Thursday's issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) by a little-known research group from the University of Arizona, is critical both of the journal Science, where the original article appeared, and of its senior author, Dr. Robert C. Gallo, one of the biggest names in AIDS research.

The JAMA article contains some of the most pointed language ever seen in the normally well-mannered scientific prints, dismissing a central conclusion of the Gallo piece as "highly dubious" and declaring that "the validity of the peer review process and self-correcting nature of scientific inquiry are also called into question."

Gallo's Science article, published two years ago, concerns Kaposi's sarcoma, or KS, an often-fatal, cancer-like skin condition whose origins and frequent appearance in gay men (but not women or heterosexual men) with AIDS represent one of the enduring mysteries of that disease.

Gallo's report, that a drug named SP-PG appeared to inhibit the development of Kaposi's sarcoma in mice, was seen as welcome news by KS patients and by physicians desperate for better AIDS treatments. "It really prevents the development of lesions," Gallo said at the time.

The Arizona group states flatly, "Serious systematic errors and omissions flaw the original study, and we cannot replicate some of the pivotal findings." The group emphasized, however, that its findings did not necessarily mean the drug is ineffective against KS.

Two weeks before the Science article was submitted, in July 1992, Gallo was ordered by Dr. Samuel Broder, director of the National Cancer Institute, to review all "primary data" for every manuscript published by Gallo's laboratory.

A spokesman declined to say whether Gallo had done so in this case, saying only that Gallo had "personally reviewed" the manuscript before it was submitted to Science. He said Gallo planned to send JAMA a response to the article "within the next few days."  

 Junk science goes belly-up

The Aids Mirage by Professor Hiram Caton (23/3/1995)

"I knew that if this retrovirus was the cause of AIDS . . . we would need to convince the academic community as totally, as widely, and as quickly as possible."—Robert Gallo.

"Scientists in the United States are forced to produce results, which sometimes warps their sense of ethics."—Luc Montagnier.

"The incredible Gallo incident will be a scar on the history of science."—Don Francis

"Gallo was certainly committing open and blatant scientific fraud."—Joseph Sonnabend.

Australian AIDS science is a mosaic of research whose key elements stem from Robert C. Gallo, MD, Director of the Laboratory for Tumor Cell Biology, National Cancer Institute. He made world headlines in April 1984 as the discoverer of the "AIDS virus". The media rejoiced that the path to vaccine prevention of AIDS was open, and that a vaccine was likely be ready for trial in two to three years. His contribution did not end there. Dr Gallo devised a test for the presence of the virus and mastered the art of growing the virus in the large quantities needed for research. The media applauded that lives would be saved by protecting blood banks and that accurate epidemiological work could now be undertaken.

The worldwide conviction that HIV is the cause of AIDS dates from this moment. The event was packaged to produce optimal belief. Health Secretary Margaret Heckler greeted the press conference in the National Academy of Sciences auditorium packed with journalists and television crews. She declared that "today we add another miracle to the long honor roll of American medicine and science. Today's discovery represents the triumph of science over a dreaded disease." The discovery was a sorely needed answer to the chorus of critics who complained that the Reagan administration was doing too little to combat AIDS. Heckler dazzled critics with Gallo's American "miracle " and reminded the public of the gratitude it owed to medicine for triumphing over "dreaded disease". Then it was Dr Gallo's turn. He outlined the science of his virus, HTLV-III, emphasising that it had been shown to cause immunosuppression. He discussed his work's relationship to other research, particularly the work of the Pasteur Institute, and conceded that HTLV-III "may be" the same as the Institute's LAV virus.

Why Question AIDS?

On April 23, 1984 Dr. Robert Gallo announced that he had discovered "the probable cause of AIDS", a new retrovirus, later named HIV.
...less than half of the AIDS patients he had used in his study were infected with HIV.

Gallo's statement was made at an international press conference, circumventing essential rules of the scientific process; he presented no evidence for his hypothesis that HIV caused AIDS--he had not published his research findings in any scientific or medical journal where they would be subject to the normal process of peer review prior to being announced to the public.

The same day of his infamous press conference, Gallo filed a patent application for an HIV antibody test (now known as the "AIDS test") and all federally funded research examining other possible causes of AIDS came to an abrupt halt.  

keywords: aids critic(s) # hiv critic(s) # hiv-aids critic(s) # gallo critic(s) # robert gallo critis(s) # dr robert c. gallo critic(s) # dr gallo court case(s) # dr gallo lawsuit(s) # National Institutes of Health # nih # aids virus # retroviruses # retrovirus # hiv # aids # dr. luc montagnier # azt toxicity # azt critics # aids censorship # hiv-aids censorship # haart toxicity # interferon toxicity # hiv test false positive # critical virology # critical virologists # hepatitis-c critic(s) # hep-c critic(s) # hiv-hcv critic(s) # hiv test critic(s) # aids lie(s) # aids war(s) # aids keywords # aids critics keywords campaign # hiv critic(s) # hiv-aids critic(s) #






welcome visitor

Abonnieren Sie den FitReport - Newsletter

anmelden abmelden


bitte unterstützt >> Aids Kritik Stichwort Kampagne please support >> Aids Critics Keywords Campaign


 | Home | Deutsch | Leber | Hepatitis | Virologie | Naturheilkunde | Selbsthilfe | Ärzte | SuchHilfe | Newsletter | Musik | DVD | Buecher ABC |

 | English | Liver | Hepatitis | Virology | int. HepLinks | Nat. Remedies | Yin-Yang | MediaReports | Encyclopaedia | Wellness | Search Help |

(c) 2001-2010 by think: FITNESS | haftungsauschluss / disclaimer | contact webmaster | please bookmark this Site | SiteMap | Impressum