HIV/AIDS Skepticism

Pointing to evidence that HIV is not the necessary and sufficient cause of AIDS

Montagnier in another patent dispute

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2009/03/08

The following story, just in from the Telegraph (UK), deserved to be passed on, I thought.

It interests me not only because of the AIDS connection, but because when I worked in electrochemistry I knew Arthur Pilla, who worked with an orthopedist (Andrew Bassett) to develop a electromagnetic technique that became a standard way of healing certain bone conditions and fractures. Pilla believed that many biological reactions could be stimulated specifically and individually if one could find the right type of signal (wave form, frequency, intensity, etc.)

So I don’t regard it as impossible a priori that the Robert/Montagnier approach might actually work.

**********************

Man who co-discovered HIV virus accused of stealing rights to Aids cure
A Nobel prize-winning French researcher who co-discovered the virus that leads to Aids but sparked controversy after his colleague said he had claimed all the glory, has now been accused of stealing the rights to a revolutionary invention that may provide a cure to the disease, it emerged yesterday.

By Henry Samuel in Paris
Last Updated: 11:23PM GMT 08 Mar 2009

Prof Luc Montagnier is locked in a legal battle with inventor Bruno Robert over the intellectual property rights to a technique whereby the Aids virus and other serious ailments, including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, can be pinpointed by their electromagnetic “signatures”.

The hope is that once identified, the diseases can be blocked or neutralised with an opposite electromagnetic signal.

Mr Robert, 47, approached Mr Montagnier in May 2005 with his work on electromagnetic waves. In November of that year, Mr Bruno registered a patent for the process of homing in on a “biochemical element presenting a biological activity through the analysis of low-frequency electromagnetic signals.” A month later, France’s patents body, Inpi, was surprised to a request for the very same patent from Prof Montagnier.

Last Tuesday, Prof Montaignier took Mr Bruno to court, claiming the intellectual property rights over the discovery. The verdict is due on 20 May.

Mr Bruno’s lawyer alleged in Le Journal du Dimanche that Prof Montagnier had already admitted that he had not come up with the discovery, as he had signed a contract to use Mr Bruno’s technique in 2005 in exchange for 100,000 euros per year over a five-year period. Mr Bruno never received any payment. Prof Montagnier’s lawyer said the pair had only signed a “protocol agreement” which was not legally binding.

Prof Montagnier was awarded a Nobel prize last year for discovering the virus that leads to Aids along with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi. A third researcher, Jean-Claude Chermann received no award despite being hailed by peers as a key driving force in the lab.

Prof Chermann accused his former colleague of squeezing him out by intense lobbying. “Frankly, Montagnier, everyone laughs about him,” he told Le Monde. “He followed communication lessons, cut his moustache, put on a little waistcoat…He played the mandarin like hell. I, for one am not a (re)searcher, I’m a finder,” he said.

11 Responses to “Montagnier in another patent dispute”

  1. Dave said

    To remind folks new to this:

    1. Here’s the book that details the first patent dispute between Montagnier and Gallo — two bumbling thieves fighting over fake diamonds.

    2. Here’s a legal document — Gallo’s sworn declaration — from the case, Gallo v. Montagnier.

    Who knew scientists could be so litigious? 🙂

  2. Alex said

    Just wanted to commend the great work you have been doing. I am a frequent visitor to your blog and all of your hard work is well appreciated by many.

    I am hoping that soon the world will learn the truth about HIV/Aids

  3. Cathy said

    I do believe it was Robert O. Becker who first developed the electromagnetic technology for bone healing (he began his research in 1958). He never patented anything because he also recognised that because the technology caused cells to de-differentiate, that the potential was there for causing cancer. Others weren’t so reticent.
    If you haven’t yet read his “The Body Electric” I can highly recommend it.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Cathy:
      Thanks! I’ve got Becker’s book, just refreshed my memory.
      Yes, he worked on bone regeneration as early as 1958. What I had recalled was that Becker caused quite a stir among electrochemists around the late 1960s by showing that he could get rabbits to regenerate part of a limb by electrical stimulation, and that led to an NSF workshop I participated in, in the early 1970s, on “bioelectrochemistry”.
      Now looking back into the book reminds me that Andrew Bassett had worked with Becker. Also, that Becker had been using direct current, and I think what Pilla contributed when later working with Bassett was the use of electromagnetic fields. At least two advantages: One, with direct current, needed to carefully monitor what was happening because bone generated at one electrode but was lost at the other; two, surgery was needed to implant the electrodes onto the bone. With alternating (electromagnetic, a.c.) fields, the electrodes can be placed on the skin, and there’s no problem of bone loss. I believe this has become a quite routine treatment for a congenital condition where part of what ought to be bone remains cartilage; the grandson of one of my friends benefitted from this about 20 years ago already.

  4. Cathy said

    It’s a fascinating subject because it also ties in with Bechamp, Rife, Reich and others, especially where it comes to nanoparticles (nanobacteria) and hydroxyapatite. When I read Becker’s book I almost fell off my chair when I read the de-differentiation bit. Well the whole book was excellent. In fact I’m going to read it again.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Cathy:
      Yes, the de-differentiation is fascinating. I thought I recalled that red blood cells had been shown to dedifferentiate under certain electromagnetic fields, and a Google search quickly turned this up from 1980:
      Proceedings of Conference: Automated Cytology VII — Automated absorption image cytometry of electromagnetically exposed frog erythrocytes
      A. Chiabrera, R. Viviani , G. Parodi, G. Vernazza, M. Hinsenkamp, A. A. Pilla [Bioelectrochemistry Laboratory, Orthopaedic Research Laboratories, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University], J. Ryaby, F. Beltrame, M. Grattarola, C. Nicolini — Presented at Automated Cytology VII, Asilomar, California, November 25-30, 1979.

      This comes to mind whenever I hear the continuing arguments about research on embryonic stem cells. In my view, given the strong opposition to this on religious grounds, every other avenue ought to be thoroughly investigated before research on human embryos is resorted to; and electromagnetic cell dedifferentiation is an obvious candidate. Moreover, that — as well as research on adult stem cells — offers a very significant possible advantage over embryonic stem cells. Any foreign tissues are likely to stimulate rejection. Even embryonic stem cells might do that. But if one could dedifferentiate a patient’s own cells, rejection would not be a problem.

  5. Sadun Kal said

    Weird news. And I thought Montagnier wasn’t in need of money…
    Perhaps the Perth Group should also sue him for their oxidation theory.

    “…he could get rabbits to regenerate part of a limb by electrical stimulation”

    That sounds interesting. How significant was that regeneration? What’s the state of that kind of science today?

    • Henry Bauer said

      Sadun Kal:
      I don’t think Becker ever achieved total re-growth of a perfect rabbit’s limb, but I seem to recall that there was some regeneration of skin, bone, and even nerves. Certainly enough to warrant further work.
      But “bioelectromagnetics” remains a rather small field not quite integrated into medical research. It has its own society and journal. At the same time, the subject is still exploited by quacks making unfounded claims. For a brief history of how studies of the interaction of life and electromagnetism have oscillated between acceptance and rejection by mainstream medical science, see p. 119 ff. in my book, “Science or Pseudoscience: Magnetic Healing, Psychic Phenomena, and Other Heterodoxies” (University of Illinois Press, 2001)

  6. Cathy said

    Prof. Bauer:
    I completely agree –– why use foreign stem-cells from a source that causes so much controversy and, dare I say it, pain for some people’s beliefs if there is a potential alternative? I also read something a couple of years ago about the human spleen being capable of generating stem cells that could differentiate into beta cells in the pancreas and possibly other tissues (sorry, no references, just casual reading). A prominent NZ researcher (Prof. Garth Cooper) has been involved in (very controversial –– he had to do it offshore) Islet-cell porcine xenotransplants, which require a fair amount of immunosuppressive therapy; you wonder why the will isn’t there to explore the wonders of healing within our own bodies. I did meet Prof. Cooper at a diabetes/endocrinology journal club here years ago, but unfortunately he didn’t respond to an e-mail from me asking for further clarification –– possibly because of medical “politics”.
    Sadun Kal –– they may not have achieved complete regeneration of a rabbit limb but Dr Becker did manage complete regeneration of frog limbs based on his “current of injury/healing” studies on salamanders.
    And now, Prof. Bauer, I’m going to have to order and read your Science or Pseudoscience, gaah, my reading list never ends.
    Richard Gerber’s “Vibrational Medicine” is also an interesting read for those able to think outside the box on “alternative” (or as our “friends” are wont to describe “woo”) medicine.

  7. JEFF said

    Has hard proof been presented that the electromagnetism therapy has actually cured HIV/AIDS in anyone ever? Does this really work or is it a hoax?

    • Henry Bauer said

      Jeff:
      I haven’t seen anything more than this news story. I don’t know how stringent the requirements are for filing a patent in France. I suppose it’s possible to get a copy of the patents, but I don’t know how.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s