[Letter to Colleagues from Peter Duesberg]
Annotations Tools
9 Alternatively, one could hold to the figure 20,000 per year and present the comparison on a yearly basis, but some transparent way of citing just how this number was obtained must be devised. Now finally, this reviewer is not happy with the quoted number of 10% of the adult population being considered "homosexual." First of all ref 57 is not the best one to use. The section of ref 57 that deals with this subject is Fay et al. in press, Science 239. Well it was finally published as Fay,RE, Turner,CF, Klassen,AD, and Gagnon, JH. Science 243, 338-348 (1989). These au's specifically state that the best numbers that they can come up with are "1.6 to 2.0% of US male population has had one or more male contacts within the previous year" (see Abstract and their Table 7). Is it realistic to classify as "homosexual" for purposes of the AIDS inquiry as anyone who has had any male:male contact? It would seem to this reviewer that at least one contact during the past year should provide the number for the denominator to the 20,000 AIDS cases. Presuming that the author's number of 80 million is correct (better check!) for the total adult male population, then replacing the 10% by the 2% number from Fay et al, we must reduce the 8 million to 1.6 million, thereby increasing the author's 0.25% to 1.25% This is still a very low number and apparently it has been stable over the past three years. Most homosexuals in the US (as defined) do not and will probably never get AIDS. This is not readily reconciled with a new sexually transmitted infectious agent, which HIV is postulated to be (13). This reviewer agrees with that statement. Now the author has a transitional problem: he has just built the case that most homosexuals will not get AIDS, and now he plans to talk about their additional risks. Clearly a transitional sentence is required; this reviewer suggests: While most homosexuals do not get AIDS diseases, some do, and they represent more than 59% of the cases (15, Table 3). Therefore it is reasonable to ask: "What other risks are homosexual males subject to?." p8 11 "Indeed, a study by the CDC from 1987 lists..." It would be smoother to say: "A 1987 study by the CDC lists numerous other categories of AIDS risks factors in a group of 359 homosexual-men from San Francisco (58)." p8 line 3-10 Here are some excellent observations that support the idea that this group consumed a pharmacy of. drugs and had been infected with about every venereal
-
Scan #1
Page 1 - Title Page
-
Scan #2
Page 2
-
Scan #3
Page 3
-
Scan #4
Page 4
-
Scan #5
Page 5
-
Scan #6
Page 6
-
Scan #7
Page 7
-
Scan #8
Page 8
-
Scan #9
Page 9
-
Scan #10
Page 10
-
Scan #11
Page 11
-
Scan #12
Page 12
-
Scan #13
Page 13
-
Scan #14
Page 14
-
Scan #15
Page 15
-
Scan #16
Page 16
-
Scan #17
Page 17
-
Scan #18
Page 18
-
Scan #19
Page 19
-
Scan #20
Page 20
-
Scan #21
Page 21
-
Scan #22
Page 22
-
Scan #23
Page 23
-
Scan #24
Page 24
-
Scan #25
Page 25
-
Scan #26
Page 26
-
Scan #27
Page 27
-
Scan #28
Page 28
-
Scan #29
Page 29
-
Scan #30
Page 30
-
Scan #31
Page 31
-
Scan #32
Page 32
-
Scan #33
Page 33
-
Scan #34
Page 34
-
Scan #35
Page 35
-
Scan #36
Page 36
-
Scan #37
Page 37
-
Scan #38
Page 38
-
Scan #39
Page 39
-
Scan #40
Page 40
-
Scan #41
Page 41
-
Scan #42
Page 42
-
Scan #43
Page 43
-
Scan #44
Page 44
-
Scan #45
Page 45
-
Scan #46
Page 46
-
Scan #47
Page 47
-
Scan #48
Page 48
-
Scan #49
Page 49
-
Scan #50
Page 50
-
Scan #51
Page 51
-
Scan #52
Page 52
-
Scan #53
Page 53
-
Scan #54
Page 54
-
Scan #55
Page 55
-
Scan #56
Page 56
-
Scan #57
Page 57
-
Scan #58
Page 58
-
Scan #59
Page 59
-
Scan #60
Page 60
-
Scan #61
Page 61
-
Scan #62
Page 62
-
Scan #63
Page 63
-
Scan #64
Page 64
-
Scan #65
Page 65
-
Scan #66
Page 66
-
Scan #67
Page 67
-
Scan #68
Page 68
-
Scan #69
Page 69
-
Scan #70
Page 70
-
Scan #71
Page 71
-
Scan #72
Page 72
-
Scan #73
Page 73
-
Scan #74
Page 74
-
Scan #75
Page 75
-
Scan #76
Page 76
-
Scan #77
Page 77
-
Scan #78
Page 78
-
Scan #79
Page 79
-
Scan #80
Page 80
Actions
About this Item
- Title
- [Letter to Colleagues from Peter Duesberg]
- Author
- Duesberg, Peter
- Canvas
- Page 42
- Publication
- 1993-01-12
- Subject terms
- letters (correspondence)
- Series/Folder Title
- Scientific Research > Duesberg AIDS Hypothesis Controversy > General
- Item type:
- letters (correspondence)
Technical Details
- Collection
- Jon Cohen AIDS Research Collection
- Link to this Item
-
https://name.umdl.umich.edu/5571095.0256.009
- Link to this scan
-
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cohenaids/5571095.0256.009/42
Rights and Permissions
The University of Michigan Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes, with permission from their copyright holder(s). If you decide to use any of these materials, you are responsible for making your own legal assessment and securing any necessary permission.
Related Links
IIIF
- Manifest
-
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/api/manifest/cohenaids:5571095.0256.009
Cite this Item
- Full citation
-
"[Letter to Colleagues from Peter Duesberg]." In the digital collection Jon Cohen AIDS Research Collection. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/5571095.0256.009. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 17, 2025.