How the Aids Lobby Deceived Politicians, Doctors and the `Experts', Wasting [Pounds Sterling]1.5bn of Your Money; FOR TEN YEARS, THE MAIL ARGUED THAT HETEROSEXUALS WEREN'T PRIMARILY AT RISK. YESTERDAY, GAY PRESSURE GROUPS FINALLY ADMITTED WE WERE RIGHT

Daily Mail (London), June 20, 1996 | Go to article overview

How the Aids Lobby Deceived Politicians, Doctors and the `Experts', Wasting [Pounds Sterling]1.5bn of Your Money; FOR TEN YEARS, THE MAIL ARGUED THAT HETEROSEXUALS WEREN'T PRIMARILY AT RISK. YESTERDAY, GAY PRESSURE GROUPS FINALLY ADMITTED WE WERE RIGHT


Byline: ANN LESLIE

WELL, well, what a surprise! At last, the gay lobby has finally come clean and admitted to the truth of what I and this newspaper have been saying, repeatedly, over the last decade.

The heterosexual Aids `epidemic' in this country does not, and never will, exist. The scare was the result of deliberate deception on the part of the gay lobby.

That fact is bad enough. What makes it much worse is that this Government long ago decided that it would be politically incorrect not to go along with the scare tactics of the money-hungry Aids lobby.

The cost - medically, culturally and monetarily - of this grotesque folly has been immense. In one article, written eight years ago, I pointed out that militant gays in the United States understandably believed that if they did not stress the heterosexual risk of Aids, their government would not cough up money for what might otherwise be dismissed as a `minority' tragedy.

I also pointed out that this same deceitful tactic was now being deployed in Britain, and that millions of pounds of taxpayers' money was being siphoned off by the Aids lobby under false pretences. This was scarce health-budget money that could have been used far more usefully on the major killer diseases which afflict us all, and not principally those who, like promiscuous gays and drug-abusers, knowingly indulge in high-risk behaviour.

In 1994, the United States allocated $2.58billion to Aids - the largest amount it had ever allocated to any single disease. In this country, the money allocated to Aids far outweighed the amount given to breast cancer, which kills many more people in one year than Aids has killed in a decade.

I stressed that Aids was not simply a tragic and incurable disease: it was a boom industry. The money being siphoned out of taxpayers' pockets was enriching the ad-men, the hucksters, the carpet-baggers who were swarming on to the Aids gravy-train, all shrieking: `Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!'

Astonishingly, at one point, the number of people involved in counselling, helplines and Aids bureaucracy far outnumbered the actual sufferers. For every three victims in Britain there was one Aids support organisation. I argued that for the Aids `epidemic' to spread from the original high-risk groups it would have to affect large numbers of women who had no high-risk co-factors.

The Aids lobby `proved' that it was indeed spreading among women. True, the numbers affected were very small - but those small numbers were deemed to be the tip of the iceberg.

I explored the reality behind those statistics - and discovered that the vast majority of such women either had high-risk factors in their lives (such as intravenous drug-abuse, anal intercourse, a history of VD) or had bisexual high-risk partners or who came from `high-risk' areas such as Africa.

Mrs Mary Ordinary, of Acacia Avenue, had about as much chance of getting Aids as she had of being struck by lightning. I further pointed out that the prevalence of heterosexual Aids in Africa did not prove that heterosexual Aids would reach epidemic proportions here.

The conditions in Africa are quite different: war, poverty, primitive medical facilities and large itinerant male workforces who, leaving their families at home, resort to prostitutes have all contributed to an `ideal' environment for HIV transmission in Africa.

But even the epidemic of heterosexual Aids in Africa is now being questioned. There is evidence that many people who have died of other, endemic diseases such as malaria are classified as Aids victims because Aids, being a fashionable obsession in the West, attracts vast international funds, whereas more mundane but just as deadly and more prevalent diseases do not.

Indeed, if Aids is virtually de-populating sub-Saharan Africa (as Aids lobbyists insist), how come the population there is actually rising by 3 per cent a year, and that by 1994, the entire continent had only 345,000 cases, fewer than in the United States? …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

How the Aids Lobby Deceived Politicians, Doctors and the `Experts', Wasting [Pounds Sterling]1.5bn of Your Money; FOR TEN YEARS, THE MAIL ARGUED THAT HETEROSEXUALS WEREN'T PRIMARILY AT RISK. YESTERDAY, GAY PRESSURE GROUPS FINALLY ADMITTED WE WERE RIGHT
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen
Items saved from this article
  • Highlights & Notes
  • Citations
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Search by... Author
    Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.