This is an old version of AIDSTruth.org that is no longer maintained. Please go to our new site at: http://www.aidstruth.org/new/
 
 
Search:
 
Home
 
About Us
 
In The News:
 
AIDS Denialism:
 
      Debunking Denialist Myths
 
      Who the Denialists are
 
      Answering Denialists
 
      Features, Editorials & Letters
 
      Legal Issues
 
      Misuse of Studies
 
      Denialism and Politics
 
HIV/AIDS Science:
 
      Scientific Studies
 
      Benefits of Antiretroviral Drugs
 
      Supporting Information
 
      Anti-denialist Websites
 
AIDS Pseudoscience:
 
      Alternative AIDS Treatments
 
      Pseudoscience and the Media
 
      Pseudoscience and Politics
 
      Pseudoscience Satire
 
Spanish Pages
 
HIV/AIDS Glossaries
 
HIV/AIDS Organizations
 

The Silvah case

In the Silvah case, a young child acquired a needle-stick injury from a discarded syringe he found in an area known to be frequented by IV drug users, who, in turn, are known to be at risk for HIV infection. The mother took the child to a local hospital, where a standard, prophylactic regimen for prevention of HIV transmission was prescribed by the attending physician. The regimen contained zidovudine (AZT). The mother later fell under the influence of AIDS denialists and was persuaded to sue the attending physician and a second physician who also saw the child and recommended that the prophylactic regimen should continue. The basis of the mother's lawsuit, which also involved Glaxo SmithKline (the makers of AZT), was that her child, by receiving AZT, had been exposed to a "cancer-causing poison" (sic). Appearing as "expert witnesses" for the prosecution were Rasnick and, eventually, Duesberg. The case was resolved before the trial, when the court granted the summary judgment motion of GSK and determined that there was no issue meriting a trial.

Here is the summary judgment and relevant declarations:

















 
 
 

AIDSTruth.org