Nick Bennett has developed a bit of a reputation with AIDS skeptics for libelous double-dealing. He runs aidsmyth.blogspot.com --where he poses as a specialist HIV/AIDS doctor.
On his blog earlier this year, Bennett complained that journalist, Liam Scheff had failed to approve a couple of his comments on Scheff's blog. He railed at the "irony of it."
It turns out that the irony cuts both ways. On Bennett's blog, I recently began to debate him on the recent climbdown by the AIDS estabishment over their now-abandoned promise of a global heterosexual AIDS epidemic. Guess what? He allowed my comment and he responded, but failed to approve my comment in reply on his blog. Irony indeed.
It seems that debate is way too hot for Bennett. The despicable scaremongering by the AIDS establishment about heterosexual AIDS is completely indefensible. No wonder he doesn't relish trying.
The start of the 'debate' is here. My never-published comment follows:
I would like to come back to you on a couple of points. You said:Sure, we can have a polite "debate", when you admit that the Independent story was a good media tale which needed to have the quoted scientist put out a reprimand to them.http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/110984.phpThat so-called 'correction' looks good until you examine what it says:First and foremost, the global HIV epidemic is by no means over.But in his comments in the Independent, Dr. De Cock never said it was! Why correct what he didn't say?What he did say was that the threat of a global heterosexual AIDS epidemic is over.And the 'correction' does not refute that.The 'correction' also says this:"Worldwide, HIV is still largely driven by heterosexual transmission."Again, Dr De Cock didn't say it wasn't! But it is a very interesting point.Because, as the W.H.O. says, heterosexual transmission is the primary infective vector, and Dr. De Cock's uncorrected statements say that vector is vapor ware.It always was.Moving on, you said:"Arguably, and I do argue this, the fact that the heterosexual epidemic was slowed (not stopped) in the Western world was directly as a result of the warnings given out to the population in the 1980's."Do I need to cite the presistently high STD rates in the Western world? You know, the ones that show people did not heed the 'safe sex' message.HIV in the developed world was not halted by condoms. It was halted by its less-than-miniscule heterosexual transmission.The AIDS skeptics were right about that. Deal with it.As to why Mr. Pasquarelli died, I don't have his medical history at hand to make definitive prognostications or even to do a differential diagnosis. Do you? It's off-topic anyway. We are talking about the facts on global heterosexual AIDS, not GRID or David Pasquarelli's health.I am saying is that the AIDS establishment can, and has, gotten it horribly wrong.That's a systemic problem you can help address. In all our interests.The persistence of opinions you do not share may not be due to intransigent AIDS-skeptics.It may be due to errors (or lies) like the now-dubious predictions of a global heterosexual AIDS epidemic.
