Voir le sida autrement

I just read Gallo's transcript which David Crowe posted at http://aras.ab.ca/articles/legal/Gallo-Transcript.pdf

I was stunned and amazed to read Gallo's transcript. I was not sure if Gallo was defending HIV or if this was simply a round about way to do a public admission of guilt or perhaps a practice session for upcoming trials.

My perceptions of some amazing facts from the case:

Compare pg 1255/lines 8-13 as Gallo portrays himself to be innocently unaware of White House Health Secretary Margaret Heckler's knowledge of his claims, and that she having somehow seemingly unwittingly had gotten hold of his papers and was so impressed that she called him back from Europe to do a press conference TO BE COMPARED TO: pg 1295 31 to 33 where he admits "we told Secretary Heckler we were convinced that the cause of AIDS was in our hands".

1) Pg 1294 lines Gallo agrees that he only had 40% of his AIDS patients that showed evidence of his virus.

KB: 13-15: You had isolation from 48 out of 119 or 40%.
RG: 19: I agree

2) Same page Gallo agrees that 40% is NOT proof of infection!
KB: 22 to 23: Do you agree that the isolation of HIV from only 40% of patients is not proof that HIV causes AIDS?
RG: 28-30 I would say of course, in and of itself 40% isolation of a new virus I would not say is the cause.

3) Page 1300 And Gallo admits to having even less than 40%
KB: 24 to 31: For Jevenile Aids the percentage positive was 37.5%, Adults with KS, 30%, Adult AIDS with opportunistic infections 47%, Do you accept your figures?
RG: line 32: I accept the figures.

4) Pg 1301 21-30 Gallo cries early ignorance and says but the WHO, NIH, NAS, IOM, UNA, and even Pasteur Institute all told him that his data was OVERWHELMING!
RG 21-30 You put all the data together we knew in 1984, let me put it to you this way, WHO evaluateed this problem, The NIH evaluated, The NAS evaluated, The IOM evaluated, UNA evaluated, and the Pasteur Institute. All have come to the conclusion that the data is OVERWHELMING." (Sure, based on him proclaiming it to be overwhelming! )

Pg 1302 lines 23 to 1303 Electron micrographs were not even Gallo's.
Lines 35 to 1303 1 to 28. Gallo ducks and covers to avoid answering.

Pg 1303 Line 29 Gallo says nobody needs or uses EM photo's anyway.
Pg 1303 Line 30 Gallo Says Nobody is obligated to publish any EM photo (even though he used one to assist in proving his virus, and it was not even his)

Pg 1304 line 6 to 8 Gallo Squeals about being asked about the photo.

Pg 1304 Line 9 to 17 THE JUDGE tells it like it is, just answer the questions.

Pg 1304 20 to 1305 Line 11: Gallo says he used the picture cause it was just so magnificent, not because it was his.

Pg 1306 line 29 to 32, Gallo claims 99.9 percent of HIV scientists are Cancer scientists who nothing about retroviruses.

Pg 1308 7 to 20, Gallo admits there are lots of stuff that looks like retroviruses, but is just cell particles.

Pg 1310 27 to 31 Gallo says to prove it is a virus, you have to prove it's transmitted! (But offers no proof of transmission, except for evidence of RF activity, which he admits is not exclusive to retrovirus).

Pg 1311 30 to 36 Gallo, even though he just said on pg 1303/29-30 EM's are unimportant, claims that Montagnier proved he had a virus because he had an EM photo of it!

Pg 1312/3-5 Gallo told off the EM photo guys until they simply agreed with him.

Pg 1312/23-24 Gallo said Montagnier would just make things up. "I tell him something, and he makes something up and tells me something".

Pg 1315 Gallo asked why his and Montagniers elisa and wb tests differed and Gallo volunteers that they simply agreed to adjust them so they would all match, no scientific reason, just a gentlemans agreement.

Pg 1317/8 to 38 Gallo admits to finding no virus in KS or in T Cells.

Pg 1318/12 Gallo himself says the WB test is not adequate.

Pg 1318/18-21 Gallo admits that PCR, (what is called "the Viral Load Test" can not be used to prove a virus.

Pg 1318/22 Gallo, does not even know the first name of his former partner "I think his name is David", and co-paper writer in dozens of papers, David Baltimore. He is either getting senile or obviously losing it.

[...]

NDLR: Une nouvelle révolution scientifique Mr T. Kuhn