And this is why peer review is a joke.

[Kai]

Apart from what already has been said - the one benefit I can think of is that it may challenge people's though about the mechanism involved in the development of HIV so that new angles and vectors are investigated for prevention and cure.  I guess the one thing I gained was thinking about the possibility of a vaccine as a result of not exclusively linking HIV to aids, however, that's just misinformation covering misinformation...

Or, an analysis of experimental systems over here from Stanford
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,31712.0.html

It won't challenge people's thoughts though. What it has done is enable peoples already held arguments. If you believed that AIDS is a result of HIV infection, the mere presence of an AIDS-denialist paper will tend to cause that belief to be held even more strongly, and if you believe that there is no connection, then the paper will enhance your belief there is no connection. This is regardless of the refutation; THAT will actually cause the above beliefs to strengthen, especially the AIDS denial belief. Changing one's mind rather than just gliding on cognitive bias takes great awareness and effort.

[Kai]

Further happenings related to this paper: One of the authors of the Duesberg paper is under academic investigation for teaching AIDS denialist doctrine to students. http://www.nature.com/news/inquiry-launched-over-aids-contrarian-s-teaching-1.10250

[hirley0]

lime maroon 5:30:30