mass of circumstantial and scientific evidence presented in myearlier book 'Deadly Innocence: Solving the Greatest MurderMystery in the History of American Medicine' [4] showed themost plausible way Dr. David Acer could have infected sixpatients with the AIDS virus between December, 1987 and July,1989 was by intent, just as Edward Parsons alleged.'Deadly Innocence,' along with three investigation reports Isubsequently published in the scientific/health professionaljournals 'AIDS Patient Care,' [6] 'Clinical Pediatric Dentistry,' [7]and the 'British Dental Journal,' [8] provided evidence that Dr.Acer was developmentally and behaviorally predisposed tobecome an organized serial killer. <strong>By</strong> reviewing Federal Bureauof Investigation (FBI) methods and materials, I learned that allserial killers kill for the sake of power, control, and revenge. Themost important question in the Deadly Innocence investigationthen became, "Againstwhom did Acer hold a vendetta?"In light of Parsons's legal testimony and other evidence, itbecame evident that the dentist's primary vendetta was againstthe United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and the CDCwhom he believed developed and intentionally deployed theAIDS virus. Indeed, he held the authorities accountable for hisinfection and the deaths of scores of others.During a personal conversation with Parsons, he admitted to methat Acer was outraged by the notion that the Americanhomosexual community had been specifically targeted to receiveHIV-tainted hepatitis B vaccinations during the 1970s.Though this theory, I later learned, was embraced by at least ahalf dozen health scientists and scholars throughout the world, inthe United States, the "World Health Organization theory," as itis called, was principally advanced by Dr. Robert Strecker, apracticing internist and gastroenterologist with an additionaldoctorate in pharmacology. As a trained pathologist andinsurance industry consultant, Dr. Strecker initially investigatedthe AIDS epidemic and virus under contract with a largeinsurancecompany. Following years of research, Strecker published ahighly controversial videotape entitled 'The StreckerMemorandum.' [9]According to Edward Parsons, "David and I viewed The StreckerMemorandum at length and spent hours in heated discussion overits disturbing contents." [10] In The Memorandum, Streckeralleged that the AIDS virus was "requested," "created," and"deployed" and its effects were predicted long before theepidemic began. In short, Acer believed that he was one ofmillions of innocent victims of genocide.The speculation that Dr. Acer was angry with "mainstream"America for not recognizing AIDS as everyone's problem wasonly part of the story that the authorities and media promoted.The fact is many people are similarly angry, yet they do not go
around killing people. The explanation fell short of a plausiblemurder motive.Acknowledging the possibility that Acer, a closet homosexualwho never came to terms with being gay, may have held avendetta against mainstream homophobes, I realized Acer'ssecond plausible motive. As an intelligent, scientifically trained,solo practitioner, the terminally ill dentist would have realized hecould never spread his virus throughout the entire U.S.population. What he could do, however, and what the evidenceshowed he intentionally accomplished, was to spread the fear ofAIDS in health care throughout mainstream America.In fact, the open letter Dr. Acer published, shortly before hisdeath, spelled out his two principal vendettas against Americanpublic health authorities and mainstream homophobic society.Within eight brief paragraphs, published in Florida newspaperson September 6 and 7, 1990, Acer condemned the CDC six timesfor their alleged involvement in the viral transmissions andarticulated his grave distrust of them. He ended by subtlyexpressing his fascination with the probability of initiating masshysteria throughout the United States:"It is important to be infonned of this disease, so you are aware ofthe dangers and how it can and cannot be transmitted. As fear ofthe unknown is hard to deal with, but knowledge of what you fearcan at least help you know what action to take, if any. . . ." [5]Following months of intensive investigation, HRS and CDCresearchers failed to report Parsons's testimony, or give seriousconsideration to the murder theory. Rather, they speculated thatthis first and only documented cluster of doctor-to-patient HIVtransmission cases was most likely "an accident." They publishedthat injuries sustained by a fatigued and shaky Dr. Acer, whoperformed "invasive" procedures on his patients, were the mostlikely cause of the infections and not negligence (that is, the useof un-sterilized instruments and equipment). In addition, afterhaving the Florida Attorney General's Office review the facts,they rejected the "murder theory."Later, following years of denial, the Barbara Walters interview ofEdward Parsons, and the identification of Acer's sixth victim,Sherry Johnson, who received no invasive procedures aside fromlocal anesthetic injections, the CDC exhumed the murder theoryfor plausible consideration. Dr. Harold Jaffe, Deputy Director forHIV/AIDS Science at the CDC, quickly concluded the casewould likely remain "an unsolvable mystery." [11]Adding to the confusion, in early June 1994, a CBS "60-MINUTES" report proposed that the victims themselves were toblame. The program accused Kimberly Bergalis, the elderlyBarbara Webb, and the others of concealing sexual practices andother lifestyle risks, and said their infections came from randomcommunity exposures. Though this disinformation was quicklyand easily debunked by official as well as independent
- Page 2 and 3: EMERGING VIRUSES: AIDS &EBOLANature
- Page 4 and 5: inherent in the production of live
- Page 6 and 7: natural barrier and has been shown
- Page 8 and 9: "DAVID was an alcoholic, an active
- Page 12 and 13: investigators, for a grossly uninfo
- Page 14 and 15: NIAID-National Institute for Allerg
- Page 16 and 17: Part IIntroduction and Scientific B
- Page 18 and 19: viruses in the cow carcasses used t
- Page 20 and 21: depend to maintain our relative fre
- Page 22 and 23: ʺThe WHO Does What?ʺ"The only thi
- Page 24 and 25: the buildup of new susceptibles in
- Page 26 and 27: In 1964, shortly after President Ke
- Page 28 and 29: lymphotrophic (lymph-cell-targeting
- Page 30 and 31: immunological and therapeutic proce
- Page 32 and 33: substances used in the diagnosis of
- Page 34 and 35: Chronicle 1969;23;3:112-117.[20] Si
- Page 36 and 37: In February 1967, as international
- Page 38 and 39: experiments conducted at Porton, En
- Page 40 and 41: technique, weapon, tactic, or strat
- Page 42 and 43: mankind in general, require that th
- Page 44 and 45: experimental studies is to be comme
- Page 46 and 47: the virus genome, the genetic makeu
- Page 48 and 49: [17] Horowitz LG and Kehoe L. Fear
- Page 50 and 51: Chapter 4The Road to Fort Detrick R
- Page 52 and 53: information, I decided to call the
- Page 54 and 55: contamination) to help with manufac
- Page 56 and 57: nation. There is but one logical co
- Page 58 and 59: each part in terms of objectives -
- Page 60 and 61:
weapons, and all other methods of b
- Page 62 and 63:
two checks totaling $33,655.68 to t
- Page 64 and 65:
Not surprisingly then, among the pr
- Page 66 and 67:
and biological warfare. Indianapoli
- Page 68 and 69:
Chapter 5The Emperorʹs New Virus"Y
- Page 70 and 71:
At that time, retroviruses were see
- Page 72 and 73:
it up to here with this goddamn dis
- Page 74 and 75:
Collusion at the TopJim Goedert was
- Page 76 and 77:
HTLV-III publication in Francis's p
- Page 78 and 79:
the footprints of a retrovirus allo
- Page 80 and 81:
questions. Had Gallo been ashamed o
- Page 82 and 83:
Chapter 6Galloʹs Research Antholog
- Page 84 and 85:
- - - - -Fig 6.2 - A Model of the N
- Page 86 and 87:
That same year, Gallo and his cowor
- Page 88 and 89:
team discussed the synthesis of new
- Page 90 and 91:
STRINGNER S. YANGROBERT C. TINGBion
- Page 92 and 93:
and pellets seperated. The pellets
- Page 94 and 95:
[5] Gallo RC and Breitman TR. The e
- Page 96 and 97:
Chapter 7An Interview with Dr. Robe
- Page 98 and 99:
human viruses, and that the genetic
- Page 100 and 101:
LEN: Now, who was studying that?ROB
- Page 102 and 103:
father's recommendation that I coul
- Page 104 and 105:
LEN: OK. Explain this now. Why did
- Page 106 and 107:
the cancer virus. . . . Nixon was t
- Page 108 and 109:
LEN: OK.ROBERT: And. . . that's the
- Page 110 and 111:
ROBERT: If you look in the world, w
- Page 112 and 113:
ROBERT: They're in the references [
- Page 114 and 115:
started with BVV.ROBERT: Well, in t
- Page 116 and 117:
LEN: OK. So what happens then?ROBER
- Page 118 and 119:
apology Gorbachev offered Reagan ac
- Page 120 and 121:
slowly, and not fast. And that they
- Page 122 and 123:
immunodeficiency virus. Nature 1987
- Page 124 and 125:
GalloRC. Aminoacyl Transfer RNA Pro
- Page 126 and 127:
history, organization, and program