RE: Should anyone believe Fumento on anything?

["Franta, Jaroslav" <frantaj@aecl.ca>]

> Rick Dixon[SMTP:rickdixon@pdcnet.com] wrote on Wednesday April 12, 2000
> 1:19 PM
> 
> JOHN SEIGENTHALER stuck this in way down at the bottom of his missive on 
> Michael Fumento:
> 
>  >I
>  >should have asked more questions and sought more answers.
>  >Once the media began to report on the dangers and the soaring costs of
>  >nuclear plants, and the disposal of their waste (the dangers are as real
> as
>  >AIDS or the militia movement), citizens began to express grave concerns.
>  >The questions the media raised were responsible, if late.
> 
> I found it interesting that in a lengthy diatribe about Fumento's 
> credibility, etc., that the author chose to imply that concerning nuclear 
> power/waste that the "the dangers are as real as
> AIDS or the militia movement."
> 
> After reading that, I feel that the author has typical media credibility 
> (none).  Anyone who thinks that nuclear power/waste is more dangerous than
> 
> AIDS when tens of thousands die in this country from AIDS each year 
> (millions world-wide) and, although the number may be debated, I don't 
> believe that nearly that many die from nuclear power.  How many people
> does 
> the author think the militia movement kills each year (I'm guessing 
> <10)?  If it approaches the AIDS levels, then the media has really done a 
> disservice by not reporting all those thousands of deaths.
> 
> Responsible media?  Not in our lifetimes.
> 
> Rick Dixon
> ************************************************************************
> 
Thanks very much for that thoughtfully worded reply to SEIGENTHALER's
posting of journalistic diatribe.
Looks like we're back to the issue of journalism's ethics - which according
to a colleague's remark is a bit of an oxymoron. 
Although I was unfamiliar with Fumento's background (and I have serious
doubts that that has changed even after reading the SEIGENTHALER post ), I
personally found Fumento's articles in the National Post, etc. fairly
reliable on the issues of health/environmental risk assessment in chemical,
biological or energy (nuclear or otherwise) industries. Certainly far more
so than those of journalists "on the other side."
Since you have raised the issue of AIDS, may I offer the example of Nicholas
Regush of ABC News, whose publications on the topic were recently critiqued
by a local (Montreal) biomedical expert, Dr. Mark Wainberg (president of the
International AIDS Society). Dr. Wainberg's book review appeared in the
April 1 (Saturday) edition of the Montreal Gazette ( page J1, "Virus book is
misleading," and page J5 continuation, "Series of half-truths presented," on
N. Regush's new book, "The Virus Within" ) :

<begin quote>

Two Half-Truths Do Not the Truth Make 
[ = Dr. Wainberg's title prior to publication; items edited out from the
printed version are in parentheses: "{ }" ]

This book by Nicholas Regush may appeal to fringe elements who are anxious
to find alternatives to mainstream thinking on current topics of the day.
Hopefully, it will not make anyone's best-seller list, as it presents a
series of misleading and simplistic assumptions about some of the most
complex diseases known to occur.  The main tenet of the book is that a
recently described virus, known as human herpes virus type 6, is present
within a large proportion of humans and is largely responsible for multiple
syndromes and conditions including AIDS. 
At the same time, the author has attempted to denigrate the work of many
scientists in the field of HIV and AIDS, by citing the work of individuals
who have claimed that HIV is a harmless virus that has received unwarranted
attention and research support.

The book is misleading for multiple reasons, not least of which is that it
tries to come across as a detective story, in which two scientists, Donald
Carrigan and Konnie Knox, struggle valiantly to unearth the important role
that HHV 6 plays in human disease.  While noone would dispute that HHV6 is
an interesting virus, and one that merits further study, this book creates
the impression that HHV6 is the real cause of AIDS and that HIV is of little
or no importance.  As such, this volume may not only misinform the reader in
regard to the real facts but may { , as well, } also help to cause confusion
in a vital area of public health, i.e. the need to be aware of the role of
HIV as a leading worldwide cause of death and the need for strong
precautions to prevent its spread.

The list of scientific misstatements in this book is long.  Some of these
may be due to the fact that the author is neither a virologist nor a
physician, so let's start instead with his abilities as a journalist in
areas that do not require special expertise, e.g. direct observation of
people he has interviewed. 
Close to the beginning of the book { on p19 }, Regush refers to a 1986
meeting he had with Dr. Robert Gallo, one of the scientists credited with
the discovery of HIV.  He describes Gallo as "small and wiry, with graying
hair".  In fact, Gallo is approximately 6 feet tall, and weighs about 180
pounds.  His hair colour is a matter of dispute, since it is always dyed to
various shades of brown, black or blond, and has been this way for at least
20 years.

However, this is trivial stuff.  Of much greater importance are the
scientific reasons for taking issue with this book, i.e. that HHV6 is a
major human pathogen and probably has more to do with causing AIDS than HIV
itself. On these topics, the book presents a series of half-truths and, more
importantly, entirely ignores a series of landmark scientific discoveries
that span the last 15 years.  

Take for example on p. 26 the sad story of Gabrielle, a 14-month-old {
infant } girl, who died after coming down with a fever and bad cought.
Pathologic examination revealed that Gabrielle may have suffered from a
brain infection caused by HHV6 and that no signs of HIV infection were
present.  Well, does this prove that poor Gabrielle died of infection caused
by HHV6 or merely suggest that HHV6 may have been one of several factors
associated with her untimely demise.  It is interesting, by contrast, that {
Mr.}  Regush dismisses as mere coincidence the fact that millions of people
who have died of AIDS are known to have been infected by HIV-1.  { But,
perhaps this is what we should expect from someone who thinks that Bob Gallo
is "small and wiry". }

Another example of misleading reporting is Regush's pronouncement on { p.
169 that } how AIDS researcher David Ho had been anointed Time Magazine "Man
of the Year" in December, 1995.  Somehow, it is implied, this status gave Ho
added credibility and enabled him to assert at the International AIDS
Conference in Vancouver B.C. in July 1996 that eradication of HIV from an
infected individual had become a possibility through use of protease
inhibitors.  Scientific consensus since December 1996 has, in fact, been
that David Ho was wrong, but nowhere is this stated in the book.  Most
important, it was in December 1996 and not 1995 that Time Magazine bestowed
this honour on David Ho.  And the honour was not for having suggested that
HIV infection could be cured, but rather for showing that the use of
combinations of anti-HIV drugs can significantly extend and enhance the
lives of HIV-infected individuals.

The fact that millions of HIV-infected individuals have been helped by these
drugs, that act specifically to combat HIV replication has now been
demonstrated in hundreds of publications.  Yet, this fact has been ignored
by { Mr. } Regush, who instead denies the efficacy of the drugs and claims
that they are toxic { (see p 197). }  Fortunately, the many thousands of
HIV-infected people who have benefited from these drugs know better than to
listen to such { poppycock } claims.  Indeed, what the world needs now are
better and cheaper drugs, so that the benefits of HIV research may also
extend to the millions of HIV-infected individuals in developing countries
who cannot afford anti-retroviral drugs and are therefore condemned to the
development of AIDS and early death.  And while Mr. Regush is at it, how
does he explain the fact that clinical trials that employed drugs such as
acyclovir, that specifically block the replication of herpes viruses such as
HHV6, all failed miserably in the context of HIV infection and AIDS.
Indeed, Regush tells us on p169 that Carrigan and Knox received a grant to
study this subject.  Perhaps the results of their study did not fit with the
premise of this book and, therefore, were omitted.  

Why should selective omissions on the part of this author surprise anyone
though, when there are so many facts that directly attest to the HIV/AIDS
link.  Some examples follow:

Numerous studies have shown the likelihood of progressing to or dying from
AIDS is directly related to high levels of HIV in the blood and body organs.
Treatment with anti-HIV drugs can both prolong and enhance life, and also
dramatically reduces levels of HIV in the body.
Lab workers who became infected with purified preparations of HIV have gone
on to develop AIDS
Death rates due to AIDS in developing countries are astronomically high
because people in such areas cannot afford antiretroviral drugs.
In rich countries, the epidemic of new cases of HIV infection and AIDS among
infants has all but abated, as HIV-infected pregnant women are now routinely
treated with anti-HIV drugs to prevent the transmission of the virus to
their babies.

This is by no means an exhaustive list.  No wonder, therefore, that HIV
dissenters such as Peter Duesberg of the University of California no longer
receive government support for their work.  What government should want to
waste taxpayers' money by funding scientists who are no longer capable of
doing good research.  The so-called AIDS dissenters are repeatedly rejected
by grants committees for one reason only; their scientific ideas do not
stand up to scrutiny.

By now, it should be obvious that this reviewer considers this book to be a
cruel scientific hoax.  Unfortunately, and more seriously, it may also
endanger public health if it is taken seriously by its readers.  How many
vulnerable Canadians, for example, may decide to dispense with the need for
precautions during sexual relations, if they accept Mr. Regush's hypothesis
that HHV6 is a more important culprit than HIV in the cause of AIDS.
Indeed, the danger that these and similar ideas may take root should not be
taken lightly.  Recently, for example, President Mbeki of South Africa
announced that he wished to reexamine the issue of whether HIV causes AIDS.
In a country like South Africa, the impact of such a statement by the Head
of State on the poor and the poorly educated should not be underestimated.
{ Perhaps, President Mbeki came to this unfortunate conclusion after reading
Nicholas Regush's book or something similar on the  subject of HIV/AIDS. }

So, how many more cases of HIV may result worldwide from the sorts of
dangerous and false ideas propounded in this volume.  And what are the
motives and responsibilities of the publishers, Penguin Canada and Viking
Press.  This reviewer seriously doubts whether they would have published a
similar controversial treatise on whether cigarette smoking was unhealthy or
on the relationship a high cholesterol diet and heart disease. Regush also
parrots the dissidents' views that HIV cannot cause AIDS because so many
years usually lapse between the time of HIV infection and the development of
disease.
Well, what about the fact that both cancer and heart disease may also take
many years to develop in the aftermath of an unhealthy life style? 
{ In summary, don't buy this book.  Perhaps some good may yet come of this
exercise if its author and publishers lose so much money that responsible
editors publishing companies and book sellors will henceforth refuse to
publish work such as these that are nothing more than travesty. }

<end quote>

In a posted article,
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/pages/000310/3733762.html , Dr.Wainberg
says of Regush, "He's a master at picking up on obscure people who don't
even have a chance of getting their stuff published in the good literature,
and then saying, 'This is one of the failings of science. The scientific
establishment is not open to new ideas.' And that's nonsense." ....SOUND
FAMILIAR ? (Bertell, Caldicott, Baldwin, etc. etc.)

For his part, Regush has protested against the appearance of a review of his
book by Wainberg - with the effect that the Gazette has issued an Editor's
note, printed along with the review article, warning readers about "baggage
attached that needs explaining"  -- something they NEVER EVER bothered to do
for any other published book reviews ( see for example my RADSAFE posting at
http://romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/lwgate/RADSAFE/archives/radsafe0004/Auth
or/article-526.html  ).

[[ FYI,  Regush is a former Montreal Gazette journalist that is now a
columnist with ABC News, and has his own web site at
http://www.nicholasregush.com/intro.html ; according to his bio., at
http://www.nicholasregush.com/bio.html , "He was, for twelve years, an
award-winning investigative reporter for the Montreal Gazette, served as a
consultant to the Center for Bioethics, affiliated with the University of
Montreal, and worked free-lance as a medical analyst for CBC (Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation) radio and a producer for CBC TV's The Fifth
Estate, a newsmagazine featuring investigative stories." ...before joining
The Gazette, "Regush taught humanities at Dawson College (a local
pre-university public institution).... From a youthful interest in New Age
phenomena, he became more and more fascinated by medical issues, the subject
of such previous books of his as Condition Critical and The Breaking Point."
...for more about the notoriously unethical CBC reporting on NUCLEAR issues,
see J.A.L. Robertson's "To Air is to Err," at http://www.magma.ca/~jalrober/
]]

regards,

Jaro
frantaj@aecl.ca


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html