Gary Null Interviews Robert Gallo and Luc Montagnier

Today, hopefully, in just a few moments we will have an important interview. Dr. Robert Gallo and Dr. Luc Montagnier will be my guests. They’re celebrating the 25th anniversary of Gallo’s publication of HIV=AIDS. I’ll be asking them about that discovery and I’ll be asking them questions that I believe are important concerning what we now know about AIDS and what they would change in their analysis if they could do it all over again.

I believe we have our guests on the line now. Let’s say hello to Dr. Robert Gallo. Nice to have you with us today, Sir, and Dr. Luc Montagnier. Dr. Montagnier? Dr. Gallo?

Yes.

Thank you for being with us today.

Oh. You’re welcome. If you could speak a little louder because we’re actually using a cell phone because the restaurant’s phone – they didn’t get a very good one here. So when you can speak louder please do so.

Okay. I will pick up my volume here. First thank you.

Luc Montagnier is here next to me, and he’s going to give you his voice.

Okay.

It's me.

Yes. Thank you. Let’s begin. First, Dr. Montagnier, could you give us your opinion of what you believe are the primary causes of AIDS and what relationship would oxidative stress play in those, if any, from your point of view?

Okay. There is no doubt AIDS is transmitted by an infectious agent known now as HIV. It’s a virus, a retrovirus. There are factors which could enhance (?) symptoms caused by the virus, and one of them is oxidative stress. We study with my collaborator for a long time the effect of infections, of HIV infections, on human lymphocytes both in patients and in the laboratory. And see that this infection caused oxidative stress because there is a gene called TAT which modified the expression of anti-oxidative enzymes [inaudible]. So it’s a symptom which has to be treated and probably will improve the treatment and will improve the patient’s conditions. And perhaps also improve its immune system. Okay?

All right. One other question has – now I’m – you won your Nobel Prize for the discovery of the HIV virus. Could you explain how your HIV virus was purified in the sense of separating whole virus particles from all other organic materials, and what scientific document papers was that published in?

For a long time you know, the HIV virus has been – the DNA/RNA has been sequenced. We know all the genes of HIV. So this virus is real, there is no doubt, and the fact that if you attack this virus by specific inhibitors you improve the patient’s condition and show that this virus is causing AIDS. You cannot cure, but you can maintain life and good condition in people with specific inhibitors to the virus. So I think this will be the final proof that HIV is the cause. Okay?

Could I speak with Dr. Gallo, please?

I’m right here. Thank you.

Okay. How would you – if you could do this all over again, what would be the different approaches you would take now knowing such things as the original toxicity of AZT when it was given at 1.3 to 1.5 grams [per day] to all those patients – you wouldn’t do that today, of course, if you were a physician.

No. No. No. Despite some people believing otherwise, no one is exactly God and science progresses as it’s studied. Without the AZT experiments by Dr. Sam Broder, we would have never believed that antiviral therapy was even theoretically possible since it was the first time in the history of medicine that a demonstrable effect of lowering the virus in a clinical patient had been achieved with a rational drug that was an inhibitor of a key enzyme of the virus, an inhibitor of reverse transcriptase. Without that there would be no entry of the pharmaceutical industry and the development of a triple drug therapy, which by the way AZT is part of in many of the triple drug cocktails even in 2009. So instead of a negative appraisal of a historical medical achievement because the dose wasn’t right tell me your example. Or any of your people who talk like this of any period in medicine starting, let’s say with, give me a good example, with insulin or with the treatment of syphilis in which several people were killed at the start – immediately killed by overdose, or insulin where nobody knew the right form, the right amount. You don’t just begin with a flash from the heavens saying “Here’s how much to give.” There has to be experiments. They were done in animals first, and it was a reasonable beginning. And it really led to this great advance that Luc has already discussed, which in my view wasn’t needed for any proof of HIV causing AIDS, but was certainly a great nail in the – let’s put it in the coffin of people who didn’t want it to be the cause of AIDS, and held back progress and caused the loss of far more lives than any AZT did.

There are a number of HIV people, positive people, who have survived many years, over a decade.

Yeah. We understand that now. They have genetic – we understand the genetics of that, and for you to bring it up I would hope that you would understand the genetics equally as we do.

Well what I –

That people have variable genetics that can contribute to control of HIV, the B57 HLA gene, for example. The modification of the CCR5, for example, the polymorphism of the genes that control the making of some of the beta chemokines for example, and there are about 15 to 20 more examples. Some people are born with those. We understand the mechanism that fits perfectly with HIV, and unfortunately such people form a small minority. Since untreated people is certainly more than 90 percent who will go on to develop AIDS and die.

How do we know that? What proof is there?

How do you know it? Because we have experience. Have you been in a clinic?

Have you been to Africa?

I have been in clinics. I have spoken with thousands –

It sounds like you learned nothing.

Sir, I didn’t invite you on to be insulted nor would I insult you –

Well, the nature of your questions are insulting to the rationale of most people who are thinking people. So I could put it both ways.

I have not brought you on to insult you or degredate you in any way. I brought you on to ask a legitimate question. Now I have over 2,000 statements made by highly credible people, including Nobel Prize winners who question many aspects of the science. Are you going to dismiss all the statements made by people who have responsibly looked at the science, who are in the science like you? Would it not be better in a democracy to open a discussion, a dialogue, instead of attacking people?

No. No – my view is you’re not worth my time or effort to talk. And I’m sorry I answered the phone. You’re one of the HIV denialists. You know who the Nobel Prize winner is one is Kerry Mullis. I wouldn’t put him as a biologist let alone a physician or an epidemiologist. He is somebody who made PCR a great contribution. He’s a chemist, and that’s where it lives and ends. Let us put it simply. The National Academy of Science, The Pasteur Institute, the National Institutes of Health, every single institute in it, the Institute of Medicine, WHO, UNAIDS have all concluded that this is the cause of AIDS. So please stop this nonsense. You harm public health, and it’s a disgrace to national public radio.

I would hope that you would be – well they hung up. Okay. They have a right to do that, and we have a right to offer a legitimate challenge to them. It’s unfortunate but this is the degree to which these people are willing to make statements. All of the people that I have in front of me they will not debate. They will not sit down in front of the American public and reasonably and responsibly have a discourse. And since they refuse to acknowledge anyone who dissents from them as being legitimate I intend now to share some specific statements from these individuals, and then you decide for yourself. Dr. Kary Mullis won the Nobel Prize in biochemistry. For Dr. Gallo to dismiss him as not a biochemist when he won his – when his PhD is in biochemistry and when he won the Nobel Prize for chemistry, when he has published in chemistry journals, and he discovered and patented the polymerase chain reaction, the PCR, which is used to measure the viral load test in persons with AIDS, is both disingenuous and thoughtless. Here’s what Professor Kary Mullis, one of the first persons who had the courage to speak out about the discrepancies in AIDS had to say, “It is not even probable, let alone scientifically proven, that HIV causes AIDS. It is – if there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singularly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There are no such documents.” “HIV causes AIDS theory is one hell of a mistake.” “If you think a virus is the cause of AIDS, do a control without it. To do a control is the first thing you teach undergraduates, but it hasn’t been done. The epidemiology of AIDS is a pile of anecdotal stories selected to the virus AIDS hypothesis. People don’t bother to check the details of popular dogma or consensus views.” “AIDS is not God’s wrath or any other absurdity. A segment of our society was experimenting with their lifestyles and it didn’t work. They got sick. Another segment of our pluralistic society, call them doctor scientist refugees from the failed war on cancer or just call them professional jackals discovered that it did work. It worked for them. They are still making payments on their new BMW’s out of your pockets.” All this is from Kary Mullis the man that he just libeled or slandered.