Dissident AIDS Database

Politico-socio-economicoLobbyingPropagandaAnti-dissident
Ellis Medavoy
 Rappoport Jon
  "In 1987, I became re-acquainted with a man who calls himself Ellis Medavoy. He has since retired from his contract work as a propaganda consultant. Medavoy supplied me with several contact numbers and a small pile of documents. Using these, I convinced myself that he was entirely legitimate. That he in fact was working on AIDS, and in a very curious way. His job was to influence the press in the direction of completely accepting mainstream research on the subject of HIV. By 1987, this was not what you would call hard work. But he had been at it since 1982---when all sorts of theories about AIDS abounded in the press and in the specialized medical literature. Medavoy had been retained by "individuals who were part of the Council on Foreign Relations and the British Roundtable but were not acting as official representatives of those groups."... Medavoy began to plant the seed. He began to meet with people (some of them doctors and researchers), and he told them that they could count on the fact that a virus would be found, a virus which was causing AIDS... Medavoy told these people---who were in turn reliable sources for reporters---that Robert Gallo was surely the man who would win the race to find the cause of AIDS... Medavoy told me, "... Gallo ... was a man who wanted desperately to find a retrovirus as the cause of AIDS, just as he had been a man who desperately wanted to find a retrovirus as the cause of cancer. He had learned this new field of exploration---retroviruses---and it was his only real ticket to fame..." Gallo had been selected to be the "HIV messenger" because it was clear he would do whatever it took to finally say, "I found it!" ... And he did... All his predictions had come true... I once asked Medavoy, "Did you yourself know what AIDS really was?" He laughed. "Of course I did. I had to know. I needed that information so I could develop the necessary propaganda to counter it." "And what was your understanding of what AIDS is?" "You should know," he said. "You've been writing about it." ... Medavoy's propaganda work was aimed, in particular, at masking the continuing causes of death on the African continent---starvation, contaminated water supplies, theft of agricultural lands, and so on. Gradually, these obvious factors would be replaced in the public consciousness with a new buzz-term, HIV. As the real causes of death were allowed to flourish, depopulation would begin to overtake the population growth. ... "The green monkey," Medavoy told me, "was a myth invented to attribute the origin of HIV to Africa. It was understood that if HIV could be said to have come from Africa, then people would believe the outrageous estimates and projections for future AIDS deaths IN Africa... But the whole deal about those monkeys was really about lab monkeys in Boston who were found to have a virus 'similar' to HIV---and lab contamination was where that 'similar' virus actually came from... We were talking about stupid and careless research in labs, and we were transferring that whole business into a ridiculous myth about Africa..." In the spring of 1987, propaganda consultant Ellis Medavoy became aware that his objectives were being threatened by a University of Berkeley virologist named Peter Duesberg. Duesberg had just published a long paper in the journal Cancer Research. That paper made a case against HIV as the cause of AIDS... Duesberg was not the only problem. At Berkeley, a few other people were waking up. Harry Rubin, ... Richard Strohman, ... Phillip Johnson ... Harvey Bialy... (Eventually, this burgeoning little group would expand to include more than 300 scientists and journalists who signed on to a short letter asserting that HIV science was deficient and needed a complete review by impartial people....)... As far as Duesberg was concerned, I can tell you there were many newspapers and magazines who were ready to give his views some space. You know, maverick scientist rejects HIV as cause of AIDS. So we began a coordinated effort to keep that from happening. We let the scientists at NIH [National Institutes of Health], who had the most to lose if Duesberg could establish a credible beachhead, handle the PR on rejecting Duesberg's science. They engaged in some character assassination as well, which was fine. We, on the other side, got 'reliable sources' to go to those newspapers and magazines and tell them that to print anything good about Duesberg was DANGEROUS and IRRESPONSIBLE. That was our tack. We had our people say that thousands of people could die if they stopped believing that HIV was the cause of AIDS. Promiscuous sex would become more rampant than ever, people would get infected, get sick, and spread the virus even further... Ellis Medavoy and his colleagues had, besides Peter Duesberg, another problem on their hands... there were people who had been diagnosed as HIV positive or "full-blown AIDS" who were surviving quite well because they were taking care of their health. They were rejecting the whole HIV premise and they were exercising and changing their diets and not taking any more drugs and taking nutrients and so on. And staying away from AZT. These people were living testimonials to a sensational kind of healing---and if THAT got out far and wide, the whole sordid game could be blown off its hinges. Medavoy said, "A lot of what we did at this point was stop things from getting into print. That's often more important than planting lies."... we tried to keep track of pending stories on these people, and we went to those media outlets and told them these people were 'vegetarian kooks' and 'anecdotal examples who had not been studied by real scientists' and 'publicity seekers' and so on. We said some of them had never really been HIV positive to begin with... Some stories did appear on these survivors, but the general tone was, 'so and so is a strange curiosity and scientists are studying why he has managed to live for so long without getting sick, and this may hold promise for future research.' You know, all that crap." ... Medavoy ... told me this in 1996: "Some other operatives I was aware of played a role in getting mainstream researchers to lobby for, and win, a new standard for HIV illness, based purely on numbers of T-cells... Tests would determine if a person was 'getting sick,' or if he was 'getting better' after taking his AZT---all measured by how many T-cells ... showed up on the tests. These operatives knew, and had been briefed on this, that T-cells could actually vary all over the place, up and down, depending on factors like the time of day a person was given the test. It was another area of shoddy science, and they took advantage of it... You've got some guy who has been told he's HIV positive, and so, even though he's not sick at all, he gets tested every few months for numbers of T-cells. Sooner or later, those numbers will go down on a test..."
  stratiawire.com 20/21 Feb. 20032003