Ooops … should condoms really work counterproductively when it comes to saving lives?

The magicians continue: “UNAIDS and WHO estimate that since the availability of effective treatment in 1996, some 2.9 million lives have been saved.”

Reality check: “HIV” has a latency period of ten years. Therefore people who became “infected” during the past decade, should not be included in the calculation, because they are still healthy. For convenience purposes I just put the 2.9 million people on ten years of HAART. HAART costs about 20,000 dollars per patient per year. That makes 580 TRILLION dollars to keep 2.9 million “infected” people breathing for ten years.

Who paid for that?

There are possibly some more miracles in the new 2009 AIDS epidemic update by UNAIDS.

But don’t take the miracles too seriously, as…

“UNAIDS and WHO do not warrant that the information contained in this publication is complete and correct and shall not be liable for any damages incurred as a result of its use.”

In other words: This publication is as incomplete and incorrect as any other fairy tale.

But on the other hand: HIVers are already behaving in a clearly unscientific fashion. They do so publicly, without fear or hesitation. This is acceptable behavior when it comes to what is generally perceived as “fighting denialism”. So I guess we’re facing huge obstacles, perhaps bigger than the obstacles any group of scientific dissidents ever faced, no?

Being conscious of, but denying the imminent danger to embarrass you even more (well, I’m one of the “denialists”, so I can’t help it), I’d like to say this:

In my opinion it is not important at all, for how long somebody has been a part of this Family, or how many so-called scientific papers somebody has produced at his assembly line –– not the quantity of the work is important, but the quality of it. My favorite of the many thousands of utterly superfluous and utterly stupid non-scientific papers certainly being the study about the fantasized protective properties of male circumcision against “infection” with “HIV”, regardless of the study subject using a condom or not.

As I’m just reading your book, it is beyond me, how anybody who has reached page 19 or 20 of it could still continue to believe that “HIV” has anything to do with AIDS. It is impossible –– unless the believer has lost 95% of his brain cells.

I agree with Brian –– it is an overwhelming contribution.