Correcting Gallo: Media Denunciation of Harper's Unfounded

AIDS RETHINKERS COMPLETE REVIEW OF AIDS ARTICLE IN HARPER'S: FIND NO ERRORS

An article in Harper's magazine published in the March 2006 issue, titled:
"Out of Control: AIDS and the Corruption of Medical Science" caused a "furor" among AIDS researchers
and pharmaceutical activists.

It was written by Celia Farber, a veteran AIDS reporter, who spent two years researching and writing the article. When the article appeared, an orchestrated attack was launched on Farber, Harper's, and its editorial staff. A pharmaceutical promoting organization in South Africa called TAC (Treatment Action Campaign) spear-headed the attack and composed a manifesto that was widely disseminated on the internet, claiming Farber's article contained at least 56 errors, and was grossly misleading. The following media outlets, among others, picked up on and reported on the TAC manifesto (co-signed by Dr. Robert Gallo): The Nation, Salon, The New York Times, Gay City News, Columbia Journalism Review, and NPR.

All wrote versions of a similar story --- that Harper's had "gone straight over a cliff," and in general had committed journalistic suicide by publishing Farber.

Rethinking AIDS --- a group of international scientists and researchers (from the US, Canada, Austria, and the UK) has now released its rebuttal. It is linked here:

http://www.rethinkaids.com/GalloRebuttal/overview.html

"This is a response to the claim that there were 56 errors in the Harper's article 'Out of Control,'" said David Crowe, of Rethinking AIDS, who organized and oversaw the rebuttal document. "Our conclusion is that no serious errors were found in the Harper's article. No scientific errors were found."

Crowe stressed that this work was not commissioned by and has no connection to Harper's magazine. Asked why he put so much effort into this, Crowe said: "I did it to defend an excellent piece of journalism from an unwarranted attack and because I feel that an open discussion about the HIV/AIDS paradigm is critically important."

Asked why the group spent over three months composing its rebuttal, he said: "There was an extensive amount of research required especially since we wanted to provide citations for every claim that we made."

"The structure of the response provides the original text from the Harper's article, the claim of error made by Gallo et al, our response, plus a list of citations. The purpose of this format is to provide all the information needed to allow people to make up their own minds."