Cough and Awe
SARS by Any Other Name
by CTM correspondent Steve Ransom

Bigger than Arnie & Sylvester for the moment; bigger than Catherine & Michael; bigger even than De Niro & Devito, SARS, or Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, has been front-page news the world over. But does the evidence so far support the claims that SARS is a dangerous 'new' disease? Is there sufficient cause for such widespread panic? Could SARS conceivably just be Systematic And Ribald Scare-Mongering?

On the strength of a few very un-extraordinary deaths related to breathing difficulties and wheezing problems, the World Health Organisation has issued a global warning that some kind of pandemic could be imminent. Undeniably, from the outset, the public's fears have being fuelled to the max. Professor Andrew Burd, a surgeon in Hong Kong interviewed by the BBC, has this to say:

"With this SARS, we have colleagues fighting for their lives. We have an invisible killer in our midst. We are at war, but our enemy has no name, no identity. We are professionals and we have a job to do. This reality easily eclipses the nightmare fantasies of Bush and Saddam. Now, as I sit at home with my young son quietly sleeping and my wife pottering in the background, I wonder what tomorrow will bring?"

Aren't professors supposed to be level-headed?

CREATE THE NEED
AND MEET THE DEMAND
To more seasoned observers of this latest 'crisis', perhaps a rather familiar scenario might be taking shape. Rather than a new and dangerous disease, could the SARS pandemonium be part of a wider business plan? Create the need and sell into the demand? This is a common practice in many spheres of business, and the drug industry is no exception. The British Medical Journal recently featured an article entitled 'Selling Sickness: the Pharmaceutical Industry and Disease-Mongering'. The report, which readers are strongly advised to read for themselves, reveals the calculated manner in which unnecessary fear of disease is instilled into the public mind, in order then to market equally unnecessary drugs and related pharmaceutical services. In the introduction to their study, the BMJ authors state:

"Pharmaceutical companies are actively involved in sponsoring the definition of diseases and promoting them to both prescribers and consumers. The social construction of illness is being replaced by the corporate construction of disease. Although some sponsored professionals or consumers may act independently and all concerned may have honourable motives, in many cases the formula is the same: groups and/or campaigns are orchestrated, funded, and facilitated by corporate interests, often via their public relations and marketing infrastructure.

A key strategy of the alliances is to target the news media with stories designed to create fears about the condition or disease and draw attention to the latest treatment. Company sponsored advisory boards supply the 'independent experts' for these stories, consumer groups provide the 'victims' and public relations companies provide media outlets with the positive spin about the latest 'breakthrough' medications."

THE BUSINESS TEMPLATE
A SCENARIO TO CONSIDER
From 14th March 2003 onwards, global news agencies were telling us of various health authorities struggling to contain some kind of 'lethal' pneumonia, apparently spread by air travellers across three continents. And then, on the 19th March 2003, after a much-hyped race to track down the cause of this apparently 'new' illness, (which, naturally, had been immediately blamed on some kind of virus), researchers named a virus from the paramyxoviridae family, apparently also responsible for conditions such as mumps and measles.

"Thank God!" we cried. "The virus has been identified!" Or had it? A few weeks later, the 'expert' diagnosis of paramyxoviridae was superseded by another 'expert' announcement from a different virus laboratory, now telling us that SARS was caused by a mutated form of the common cold virus, known as coronavirus. "OMIGOD! Not a mutated virus, PLEASE!"

ALL RATIONALE WENT THAT-A-WAY
At this stage in the global drama, the international coverage had reached almost complete saturation point. Incessant images of masked orientals at airports, restaurants and shopping centres were being flashed up on our screens, many people genuinely afraid of catching this new disease. The world over, the only news we were being treated to was the threat of SARS, how people were fleeing the 'encroaching monster', and how nations should prepare. Strangely however, none of the news reporters bringing us these SARS epicentre scoops ever wore those protective masks. More on that later.

Almost a lone voice in all the hype, in the 27th April 2003 UK Observer, Dr Peter Marsh, a social psychologist and director of the social issues research centre at Oxford, stated:

"Humans tend to worry more about the unfamiliar and the improbable. It's foreign, it's eastern. The virus has been described as a 'time bomb'. There has been talk of it 'mutating'. Once you have that kind of imagery, then rational consideration, rational decision-making really goes out of the window."

Throughout the crisis, various senior health officials had been stating that because the SARS virus was a new, mutated strain, the only obstacle in the way of thwarting this global threat was the current lack of up-to-date testing kits, new antibiotics and new vaccines. Permission to research and manufacture these items had to be granted to the relevant authorities as soon as possible. Could the legislative decrees and associated massive funding be rushed through in time? Without the funding, the vital vaccines to combat SARS would be a good while away yet.

JUST ANOTHER DAY AT FORWARD PLANNING
Is SARS following the standard business template? Is it just another day down at the Big Pharma 'forward planning' department? Michael Fumento noted in a recent edition of The National Post: "There's fame, fortune, and big budgets in sounding the 'emerging infection' alarm and warning of our terrible folly in being unprepared."

The authors of the BMJ 'Selling Sickness' paper summarise their report as follows:

· Some forms of 'medicalisation' may now be better described as 'disease-mongering' - extending the boundaries of treatable illness to expand markets for new products.
· Alliances of pharmaceutical manufacturers, doctors, and patients groups use the media to frame conditions as being widespread and severe.
· Disease-mongering can include turning ordinary ailments into medical problems, seeing mild symptoms as serious, treating personal problems as medical, seeing risks as diseases, and framing prevalence estimates to maximise potential markets.

Taking stock of general panic in the SARS marketplace so far, the pharmaceutical industries have every reason to expect significant financial returns from this latest campaign. Following the Pharma Biz 'everybody panic' template almost to the letter, there have indeed been frantic requests in Beijing and Hong Kong for 'necessary' testing kits, antibiotics and other medicines to reach the 'stricken' areas as soon as possible. His 'n' hers matching facemasks, along with masks for the household pets are selling very well. In many parts of South-east Asia, facemasks and household disinfectants have tripled in price.

ABC News recently reported what is perhaps the first SARS murder - a fatal stabbing. The victim sneezed. The assailant's plea was that he was afraid his victim was spreading SARS. But even as this tragedy was unfolding, a fierce marketplace battle had already begun as major pharmaceutical companies submitted various patents on the rights to products associated with the SARS virus, such as exclusive rights to subsequent vaccines and associated SARS paraphernalia.

SOME UNSETTLING FACTS ON THIS 'NEW' DISEASE
The experts have been telling us that we have a new virus. To date however, the actual evidence that SARS is a 'new illness' is remarkably lacking. Going almost completely unnoticed in the frantic fuss, the Hong Kong health minister was interviewed at the beginning of the 'crisis' by the BBC News Night team. He admitted there was no definitive test for SARS and that this illness is identified by a particularly vague set of symptoms. He also admitted that its description covers a multitude of existing syndromes. Surprisingly, the following guidelines are the most up-to-date definition of SARS illness, taken from advice given by the US Centers for Disease Control and featured on the Star Tribune Health Science page:

Health officials have developed these guidelines for suspected and probable cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).
· Respiratory illness of unknown cause since 1st February 2003.
· Temperature greater than 100.4 degrees.
· One or more symptoms of respiratory illness such as cough, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing.
· Within 10 days of symptoms, the patient travelled to a place where SARS has spread in the community or had close contact with a suspected SARS victim.

Not one defining symptom distinguishing SARS from any other flu-like illness, except international travel? IS it beyond the bounds of possibility therefore that SARS is indistinguishable from other common pneumonia illnesses and is leading to multiple misdiagnoses?

"We have no clue as to how she was diagnosed to be suffering from SARS as she was admitted after suffering a heart attack," Kumari's husband M.D. Somabandu said. Mr. Somabandu, who is contemplating legal action, charged that the hospital was at fault for the misdiagnosis and was responsible for his wife's death. "There's one hundred per cent negligence on the part of the hospital staff," he said.

The Bangkok Post tells of a Ms Wachira Thaichon who was misdiagnosed with SARS after initially going to hospital with bladder problems. Once she was suspected of SARS, she received five injections which cost 17,000 baht each. Both her arms became badly bruised. The hospital said the cost was justified because it had saved her life. The hospital also said it had to seal off the entire 11th floor where Ms Thaichon was being treated. Upon being released from the hospital, Ms Thaichon was made to sign an agreement that she would continue to stay in quarantine for another 10 days and wear a mask and gloves.

A DISMALLY UNSHOCKING SCOOP
It is interesting to note that in the United States during 2002, more than 26,000 people died of common flu, most of whom were elderly, infirm or very young. Yet, on the 27th April 2003, the UK ITV Ten O'Clock News announced, with all gravitas, that 23 people had died from SARS across South East Asia in a single day, 12 in Hong Kong and 9 in China alone. While these deaths will of course be upsetting for the families, as far as any lead story on a genuine outbreak is concerned, it is the archetypal media damp squib. A most dismally unshocking scoop.

Doing a few simple sums, the US death rate of 26,000 per annum from flu works out at 71 deaths per day - this in a country of 290 million. The news of 9 deaths in one day in China equates to 8 times less the number of deaths in a day in a country with a population roughly 6 times greater. That is hardly sensational. Where are all the headlines drawing attention to this particular computation? Why are these and other rational observations invariably omitted from the reports? Instead, we are awash with charged, emotional accounts of a 'new disease' that, at the time of writing, has claimed the lives of just under 300 people worldwide.

Dr Peter Marsh again: "The fact is that 260 people have died. But for every Chinese person who has died, 10 million have not. In an ordinary rational world, that sounds like quite good odds, but not in this context. In this country, every year, 1,500 people are killed falling down the stairs. The implication would be that people should only be allowed to build bungalows."

And there's another unsettling fact. Whenever a death is attributed to SARS, no information is ever supplied on those all-important mitigating circumstances, such as the victims' age, general health, drug load, and accompanying environmental conditions at the time. Any medical journalist worth his salt should know that omitting such statistics from his report is not only a complete, professional no-no, but is also dangerously betraying the trust the public maintains in those who give them the news.

SOUNDING THE GONG ON THE SARS VIRUS
The only evidence that has been put forward by the medical community to categorise SARS as a new illness is the claim that a mutated virus has been identified. Yet no evidence has been proffered to the wider scientific community which actually confirms this statement. Who really questions a virologist? When was the last time you did? Nicholas Regush is the editor of RedFlagsWeekly - an internet health page. He worked regularly as a TV producer with Peter Jennings on World News Tonight, producing the health news items. Regush states:

"The media are not only befuddled when it comes to SARS, but many reporters 'on the story' are either stone deaf, blind, or just scientifically 'challenged'. Why are media reports repeatedly referring to the 'SARS Virus' when it is far from scientifically clear what SARS is? And never mind the cause of it. When a Canadian National lab reveals that a small percentage of people who apparently have SARS do not show signs of the 'new' coronavirus, or show very little sign of it, shouldn't that sound a GONG? After all, the GONG was sounded by scientists after many people dubbed 'SARS victims' in Toronto turned up negative in a test for the 'new' coronavirus. Who knows what the Toronto deaths are all about? Coronavirus? Really?"

SUPPOSITION AND ARTISTIC LICENCE
We are told the image on the right is supposed to be the new SARS virus. Yet it is only a computer-created model. It is merely a representation of what a virus 'expert' believes is causing SARS. This picture is one of several on a virus image web site, which sells such images to the press. Readers are encouraged to visit this site, if only to gain insight into the world of 'virus science'. Not one actual photograph of a SARS virus exists. All imagery available on this site, and all others for that matter, is supposition only, and mixed in with a generous amount of artistic license. An interesting report is also available on how Roger Highfield, science writer for the 'respectable' UK Daily Telegraph, intentionally used a fake picture of a virus in a full-page spread promoting AIDS theory: "We supplied Highfield with a number of images, but he specified he wanted a computer graphic." The picture editor agreed that Highfield had done a dis-service to his readership, which in the case of the Daily Telegraph approaches two million."

AN INACCURATE TEST
Moreover, the Centers for Disease Control is currently using the Polymerase Chain Reaction antibody detection test to determine the presence of this 'new SARS virus'. This highly complex technique is supposed to be able to detect fragments of genetic material in the blood that allegedly indicate the presence of certain viruses. It all sounds very grand until one actually starts asking questions of the virus experts. In discussion with a Mr John Parry, deputy head at the Colindale Virus Laboratory in the UK, he admitted that PCR was not a precise tool for identifying any virus. Yet the lab uses PCR every day for virus confirmation. Also, Mr Parry was entirely unaware that Nobel Laureate Kary Mullis, the inventor of PCR, had issued an official statement, spelling out his concerns that his invention was being used by laboratories across the world to arrive at medical and scientific conclusions for which his invention was not sanctioned, particularly HIV testing. Colindale also uses PCR to 'determine' the presence of HIV in blood samples every day.

NONSENSICAL TESTING
Confirming the paucity of so-called SARS testing, immunologist Frank Plummer, the director of Canada's National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, stated recently: "Both Canadian and U.S. data show that only a minority of people with SARS test positive for the coronavirus. It's puzzling. We just need a lot more information."

The above phrase is surely worth repeating. Only a minority of people with SARS test positive for the coronavirus. Yet none of these failures in SARS theory have stopped these same experts racing ahead anyway to work out the gene sequence for SARS. Nicholas Regush again:

"And, oh what fun when two scientific teams came up with the gene sequence (all the genetic material, supposedly) for the 'SARS Virus'. So what? What does it mean to come up with the sequence of something that may not even be a major player in a so-called major killer epidemic? The problem is that some scientists have very big mouths. They love going on TV, and telling the public about all their marvellous discoveries. They are often not challenged because the 'interviewers' are mindless about what to ask, or are afraid to upset the virus cart. I mean, I'm impressed, okay, that the Canadian team in British Columbia sequenced the 'SARS Virus' in just two weeks. But until someone tells me in some detail what the net result of that sequencing truly means, I'll refrain from referring to genetic material as the 'SARS Virus'. In fact, I defy anyone in the scientific field to argue publicly on the basis of available evidence that the cause of SARS has been adequately identified."

TRIPE FOR ALL
But these are all just 'trifling' matters to our health information outlets. As far as SARS is concerned, none of these everyday, awkward realities will bring any downward adjustment to official 'SARS death' statistics. And of course, 'discovering' the gene sequence for SARS has paved the way for the latest patents jamboree.

I was interviewed recently by BBC radio over the SARS 'crisis'. I was opposite a professor of bacteriology. It was obvious that he had never really been challenged about his work by somebody who could both critique viral theory and also remain relatively underwhelmed in the presence of a professor of bacteriology. During the interview, the professor must have repeated the phrase, "We have a new virus," about six or seven times. But once the all-important background to virus theory had been defined and contextualised for the listeners, the claims made by the professor sounded a good deal less impressive. As Regush stated, "They are often not challenged because the 'interviewers' are mindless about what to ask, or are afraid to upset the virus cart."

COGNITIVE POWERS PROFOUNDLY CHANGED
For the TV and radio producers of those doom and gloom virus news reports, tracking down qualified opinion in support of 'the threat of deadly disease' is never difficult. And throughout this SARS campaign, there have been plenty of 'qualified' medical experts available to comment on the 'frightening' spread of SARS and the 'alarming' vaccine/antibiotics shortage'. Sadly however, the unifying factor in almost all of these reports is the high level of intellectual inconsistency in the debate.

This begs the question; what can happen to one's general powers of reasoning during the gruelling process of conventional medical training? In the seven or more years' training it takes to become medically qualified, even the sharpest of minds can apparently soon become bent out of shape. Dr Michael Greger, in his book Heart Failure, offers his own account of medical school, and quotes a number of doctors who describe the pressures to conform to the pharmaceutically-focussed curriculum the institutional party line. The inside front cover of Greger's book has the following quote: "Besides medical school, there is probably no other four-year experience - unless it be four years' service in a war - that can so change the cognitive content of one's mind and the nature of one's relationships with others." On the pressure to conform, one medical student in Greger's book contributed the following:

"Support from the rest of the student body, when present, often had to be obtained anonymously. One student told me, 'I agree with you, just not in public.' 'In public' meant in front of faculty or administrators. 'In public' meant in front of other students. The worry was that a student who spoke up about issues of conscience would have narrower career choices because of poor evaluations doled out by disapproving faculty."

In the midst of any so-called 'epidemic', many such cognitively-altered medical minds are available for interview, expounding their doom-laden beliefs with utmost sincerity. Dr Patrick Dixon is one such voice.

A DASH OF MEDICAL ERROR AND A DASH OF
HOLLYWOOD IMAGERY - PRESCRIBED DAILY
Known for his seminars on 'global trends', Dr Dixon is pressing for stricter controls to 'curb the threat' of SARS and believes this latest 'epidemic' has the potential to become a real threat to global health. If allowed to spread much further, warns Dr Dixon, SARS may become a wild-fire impossible to put out. Interviewed on the 24th April 2003 BBC Breakfast News, Dr Dixon stated that the British government should get properly prepared for an inevitable epidemic. His 'Truth About SARS' website contains the following: "We are in an urgent race against time, leading potentially to many tens of millions of deaths over the next two years."

But haven't we all been here before with the AIDS scare-stories? Weren't our screens filled with similar catastrophic Hollywood imagery? The truth turned out differently. Unwarranted fear with a generous helping of medical error was the AIDS and HIV prescription. Dr Dixon was at the forefront of those early AIDS doom and gloom statistics. His book, The Truth About AIDS, warned us of a pandemic of massive proportions on the horizon. The opening chapter entitled The Extent of The Nightmare speculated that the UK could be witnessing 18,000 AIDS deaths a year. The same book warned against deep kissing, and suggested the pill and even sterilisation for women who had been tested HIV positive.

FOLLOWING AN INCORRECT COURSE
WITH THE MAXIMUM OF COMPASSION
I telephoned Dr Dixon and pointed out the physiological dangers of the contraceptive pill. I also asked him to comment on the medical evidence sent to him and to everyone at management level within his organisation, which highlighted the fact that the HIV test can react false positively to some 60 different conditions unrelated to any virus. Given the potential for such a high rate of 'false positives' from the HIV test, I concluded, should he really be suggesting this test, let alone recommending that such women should consider the irreversible sterilisation operation?

Accusing me of being a flat-earther, Dr Dixon has so far refused to seek ways of professionally resolving these crucial issues. Furthermore, Dr Dixon's same ghastly advice on sterilisation has not been omitted from his updated version of The Truth about AIDS, stored in electronic format on his website. Perhaps if enough people write in to him at patrickdixon@globalchange.com, the sterilisation advice at least would be removed.

We should also ask ourselves what sort of health and social policies might emerge, should our health system be run by decision-makers such as this? While there are a number of well-intentioned, caring people involved with Dr Dixon's AIDS care teams, the ability to follow an incorrect path with the maximum of compassion can occur in all walks of life, especially medicine. Dr Dixon has since gone on record to say that SARS could be deadlier than AIDS. Will Dr Dixon be tragically mistaken again? His Global Trend/Global Change website has reportedly received 5.5 million hits over the last twelve-month period.

OPERATION STERILISE BEIJING
On 23rd April 2003, Five PM News Hour contained an interview with a doctor who had recovered from the so-called 'new disease' of SARS. Struggling throughout the interview to make his illness sound dramatic, the doctor actually admitted that SARS is not the fatal disease it is touted to be. Undaunted by both the relative flatness of the interview and the admission by the doctor that SARS was not so lethal, news anchorman Eddie Mayer summarised the world headlines five minutes later, describing SARS as 'a deadly virus'.

The world watched as 'Operation Sterilise Beijing' provided round-the-clock, masked disinfectant teams spraying down elevators and pavements while masked pedestrians hurried on by. How reminiscent of the UK's 2001 'Operation Sterilise The Countryside' - an equally risible attempt to shock and awe us into believing that foot and mouth was 'highly infectious' and could be halted if we waded through the hurriedly-erected foot troughs scattered across the countryside. The disinfectant ritual merely served to reinforce in the public mind that we were dealing with a vicious virus on the loose. We believed the establishment line on FMD because we unquestioningly participated in the 'boot-washing' mantra. For a more factual account of the very uninfectious disease known as foot and mouth and the political intent behind the recent mass-slaughter, please refer to the Credence title, Plague, Pestilence and the Pursuit of Power.

TERRIFIED OF SARS?
THE BBC UNMASKED
Perhaps the most laughable inconsistency in SARS theory is seen in the example set by television journalists reporting from the supposed 'SARS epicentres'. If it's all so highly infectious, then why are they never wearing the 'life-saving' face masks? On this note, I contacted the BBC World Planning Department, where the coordinating supervisor for BBC Beijing conceded that there was indeed a certain inconsistency in maskless reporters announcing the spread of highly contagious disease to millions across the world. She would send an email to Beijing, she assured me, to find out why that was the case, but I should not be offended if I didn't get a reply: "After all, we are dealing with an enormous and time-consuming story."

Whatever your views on SARS, one thing is for sure. This latest hysteria will be serving the South-East Asian pharmaceutical infrastructure very well over the next few months. The knock-on business is likely to be considerable in the battle to appease the masses currently crying out for the full array of 'urgently required', anti-SARS paraphernalia. News from the experts that we face a 'mutated virus' can only add to the potential profit margin. The question is, can we in the UK resist the urge to panic? The UK Sunday Times, dated 27th April 2003, featured an article on SARS by columnist Richard Leakey, who gravely intoned, "… people in Britain are terrified of the SARS virus."

Speak for yourself, Mr Leakey. Speaking for myself, if and when Emperor SARS does visit these shores, I will not be found crushed up against the crowd-control barrier, marvelling at the grand passing. I've seen this procession before. And every time, I see nothing in the lead carriage but some still-born, shrivelled-up, shrunken, butt-naked pharma-phantasm. The question is, will any of our respected, broadsheet journalists break rank and admit the same? I doubt it. I'm still waiting for any reply to my request for information from the BBC on the conundrum of their maskless reporters.

JAIL FOR THE IRRESPONSIBLE
Perhaps more disturbing than all the inconsistencies, it seems that SARS is paving the way for the introduction of potentially quite sinister legislation. Enforced quarantine and restricted movement are being introduced into the populations with relative ease. In Canada, for instance, within a few days of the supposed outbreak, more than a thousand healthcare workers had volunteered for home quarantine because of SARS. Otherwise, they faced legal arrest and incarceration, as advised by the World Health Organization. Canadian officialdom has been closing hospitals, restaurants, schools and workplaces with only two deaths reported at the onset of the media onslaught. The media has successfully whipped the population into a trembling mass of masked and quarantined 'sheeple'.

On 23rd April 2003, the BBC announced that police in Australia have been given new powers to round up and quarantine suspected SARS victims. Singapore's prime minister has vowed to jail 'irresponsible' people who violate quarantine laws. And, despite having no confirmed SARS cases, Japan has announced plans to install a thermal imaging camera at Tokyo's international airport to screen passengers. What's really going on? Are we witnessing some sort of mass, social experiment? Even as I write this article, in the background I can hear the latest UK radio bulletin telling us that UK Health Secretary Alan Millburn is under pressure to bring in emergency powers to 'protect' us from this SARS outbreak.

Despite the inconsistencies, the SARS juggernaut proceeds apace. The patents on 'all things SARS' are already grinding through the mill. When will all these new 'life-saving' products be on our shelves? Will we be scared enough by then to submit without question to new vaccines, pills and potions?

For those concerned with protecting themselves from any flu and pneumonia naturally, why not do what's right by your body and strengthen your immune system with good nutrition and exercise? Get informed on those 'wheels within wheels' and make informed, educated choices for yourself and your family.

Achoo! Ahem! Oh no! A tickly cough at the back of my throat! Could I be infected? Might they shut down the M25?

Will any of the news teams interviewing me be wearing masks, I wonder?

steve1@onetel.net.uk

RESOURCES:
Plague, Pestilence and the Pursuit of Power
World Without AIDS
Health Wars
Available from www.credence.org

REFERENCES

'Hong Kong doctors identify killer disease', BBC News, 19th March 2003 at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2862991.stm
Moynihan, Heath, Henry, 'Selling Sickness: the pharmaceutical industry and disease-mongering', British Medical Journal online, BMJ, 13th April 2002
National Post, 28th March 2003
Moynihan, Heath, Henry, op. cit.
'Scared of SARS, man slays sneezer' at
http://www.abscbnnews.com/abs_news_body.asp?section=Metro&oid=21493
'SARS patent battle heating up', CNN News, 7th May 2003 at
http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/05/news/companies/sars_patent.reut/
BBC News Night, 2nd April 2003
Defining SARS at http://www.startribune.com/stories/1556/3848032.html
Wijeya Sunday Times, 4th May 2003 at http://www.sundaytimes.lk/030504/news/5.htm
'Sars misdiagnosis proves a costly and bitter experience', Bangkok Post, 29th April 2003 at http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/2003/apr2003/bp20030429/news/29Apr2003_news07.html
Regush, Nicholas, 'SARS and the befuddled media', RedFlagsWeekly at
http://www.redflagsweekly.com/extra/2003_may02.html
Scientific Stock Images Library at http://www.rkm.com.au/imagelibrary/index.html
Ransom, Steven, 'Telegraph Virus Reporting; the new plague?' at
http://www.whatareweswallowing.freeserve.co.uk/highfield.htm
'SARS deaths mount in Canada, Asia', UPI Science and Technology Newsdesk, 1st May 2003 at http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030501-035717-2143r
Regush, Nicholas, SARS and the befuddled media, op. cit.
Greger, Dr Michael, Heart Failure, 1999, online books at
http://upalumni.org/medschool/preface.html
Ibid.
'The Truth About SARS' at http://www.globalchange.com/sars.htm
Dixon, Dr Patrick, The Truth About AIDS, Kingsway Publications, 1987. Dr Dixon's contention that Africa is dying ultimately of a sexually transmitted disease brought about by 'rampant trans-African truck drivers', etc., has attracted a particularly large and loyal church following - a following that has the capacity to do much good, yet a following that has so far declined to question this populist stance. A survey carried out by Durex on national sexual practices, for instance, found that the UK was the most promiscuous nation by far. Yet where is the British AIDS pandemic? And then of course, there's the infamous AIDS test, now known to trigger 'false positive' to some 60 different conditions. Furthermore, so few of these workers have any idea about the dangers of the AIDS drugs they are demanding for this so-called 'HIV-ravaged' continent. Please visit www.whatareweswallowing.freeserve.co.uk/viramune.htm for a look at some of these dangers. By refusing to even consider such factors in the African AIDS debate (despite numerous official requests to do so), Africa must now do battle with an army of well-meaning but ill-informed AIDS outreach workers who are applying a dangerously incorrect 'care' hypothesis with the maximum of compassion. In their book AIDS, Africa and Racism, Richard and Rosalind Chirimuuta contend that African AIDS research has been built upon racist preconceptions, rather than objective scientific reality. Say the authors, "At times, we have felt like the boy who shouted that the emperor has no clothes, but we urge all Africans never to feel overwhelmed by the weight of scientific opinion, which has so frequently served the master race and not the truth." The ongoing dissemination of errant data by Dr Dixon and other western AIDS experts is severely impeding the path towards the correct and relatively simple treatment for the environmental affliction known as African AIDS. Sound nutrition, clean water and a general education away from completely unnecessary AIDS drugs, meddlesome western corporatism and well-meaning, misguided missionary zeal is the only triple therapy needed to see a swift end to African AIDS. If there is a plague that threatens to engulf us all, it is AIDS ignorance and gross medical error. For more information, please see World Without AIDS, available at www.credence.org

ONE BILLION TO BE INFECTED WITH SARS WITHIN 60 WEEKS, Daily Record, Wednesday 23rd April 2003 at http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/04/1603343.php
'WHO team probe SARS outbreak', Intelihealth News, 23rd April 2003 at
http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/333/29758/363758.html