[Letter to Colleagues from Peter Duesberg]

Peter Duesberg - 5/21/91
page -4 -debate of alternatives. My hypothesis could open up new and hopefully
productive avenues in our battle against AIDS.
In view of the above, I conclude that the rejection of my paper is based
on prejudicial and political reviews, and thus incompatible with the
neutrality and academic freedom of our journal. I would accept editorial
censorship based on flawed data or on flawed logic, but I am reluctant to be
censored on the basis of dissenting opinions and interpretations. Therefore, I
respectfully request that you authorize the publication of my revised paper
without further delay. If you feel that further scrutiny is required I would
hope it could be derived from expertise more directly related to the subject of
my paper - the consumption and effects of psychoactive drugs, as for
example, from W. D. Lerner (ref 23) whom I never met, rather than from the
narrowly focused HIV establishment. Further, if you feel that you can not be
an impartial editor of my paper, I suggest that you could delegate its editing to
either Walter Gilbert, Howard Green, Barbara McClintock, Sheldon Penman,
Harry Rubin, or Gunther Stent - all members of our academy who have
seen merits in my challenge of the virus-AIDS hypothesis.
Wit my personal regards,
Peter Duesberg
(authorized signature -
in Dr. Duesberg's absence
signed by Jane Byrd)
PD:jb
cc: W. Gilbert
H. Green
B. McClintock
S. Penman
R. Root-Bernstein
H. Rubin
G. Stent