Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

New AIDS film records “dedication of those who fought epidemic”

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Aids was made by government Christian scientist, scientist working for governments to kill off people who they did not want around, like gays and blacks for population control. http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/AIDS%20and%20Population%20Elimination/aids_created_as_biowarfare.htm

    1. TiredYankee 14 Nov 2011, 6:20pm

      I suggest another 10 mgs of Prozac a day will help.

      Consider increasing the dosage until th esymptoms are back in control

    2. I doubt the oxymoron of “Christian scientist” would have enough scientific understanding to make a good Martini, let alone engineer a complex viral strain. I suggest you move away from the computer before you do yourself more harm….

    3. Jock S. Trap 15 Nov 2011, 8:40am

      Low-life!!

    4. Mr. Ripley's Asscrack 16 Nov 2011, 7:03pm

      I, too, have read (mostly on questionable websites) that the HIV virus (and Ebola) was developed and manufactured as a biological agent for population control. Perhaps, Paul, you should look out the work of Len Horowitz – he would be a good starting point for you, as he is without doubt the most trusted advocate of this notion and doesn’t lack controversy or detractors, certainly his points about the US Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments raise a few eyebrows. Disclaimer though: I should point out that conspiracy theories are like a carousel that pointlessly go round-and-round-and-yawn, unless you have the good fortune of remembering that they are just a theory.

  2. C. McLuhan 14 Nov 2011, 5:57pm

    My partner and I were in San Francisco in early September and saw this film at the famous Castro theatre. The film had already been around the world once. Three of the characters in the film were present to field questions and answers after the showing.

    The film is very moving and made our visit to SF very rich indeed. The film is a must-see, especially if you lived through those times, but is also important for those who have inherited the benefits but were born after the events themselves.

    What impressed me was discovering the roles that SF and the gay community played in coming to terms with the disease and providing new hope for those who were fortunate to have survived it. The city became the hub of discovery in terms of the disease, and the whole world now benefits from this remarkable truth.

    Bravo to the film-makers and all those who participated in this labour of love.

  3. I look forward to seeing this film and how it relates to my experience with THT in London in the mid eighties and back here in Brisbane and Sydney. I hope a similar doco is made on the London experience, when “buddies ” a term I hated, were virtually on our own, in the home, hospitals and DHSS. THT held big conferences which seem to be then only accessible to the wealthier amongst us. I never had time to keep a diary which I now regret

  4. Matthew Todd is right. We need to draw inspiration from those pioneers who really got to grips with HIV and halting its relentless spread. How typical of Nick Partridge to stake a claim to this early success when THT has been instrumental in paving the way for today’s scandalous record rates of HIV infection.

    When even the House of Lords takes implicit aim at today’s HIV charities like THT and GMFA and states that HIV prevention needs shaking up, badly, it is time for Nick Partridge and Co. to admit defeat and to focus squarely on their more successful role as service providers.

    I was heartened to note that several major fundraisers this World AIDS Day will be donating a share of their proceeds to Status, like Mark Ames Remembrance Ball on 3/12/11. Ames told Boyz last week that he chose Status for its “sensible and hands-on” HIV prevention work, which hopefully makes Status a contender for the lion’s share of the next HIV prevention budget allocation awarded in 2012. Hear hear!

    1. How typical of you Samuel to yet again hijack another comments thread with your views on the HIV charities and to peddle your political views.

      As for Status they are a complete joke, they can’t even manage to put up a decent website which has not been updated since it was launched.

      I am very sure it is Peter Scott’s intention to feather his own nest yet again, particularly as he has alienated himself from all the major HIV organisations and he is probably a bit cash strapped.

      As for the “hands on approach” referred to apart from the Boyz testing bus which is an outreach project in partnership with 56 Dean Street (who incidentally did not endorse the last Status ad as they did not agree with the content) I see very little activity to help reduce HIV infection rates amongst Gay men.

      Status appears to be a self serving front for Peter Scott PLC

      1. Yeah, Samuel B.is kinda the local village idiot. Crazy but utterly harmless.

  5. Really looking forward to seeing this film as it is important for us all to relate to the effects HIV has had on the gay community over the past three decades.

    Once again gay men need to unite together to help reduce HIV infections. Only by working together can gay men understand HIV and the challenges that exist to reduce infection rates.

    Some commentators seem to want to create further divisions between positive and negative gay men which is devisive and disingenuous to those individuals who are no longer with us. We owe a great deal to the early activists who helped shape the services and care available today.

  6. Yeah, right. We owe a great deal to the activists like ACT-UP who insisted that the totally toxic AZT was released for use without proper trials. How many hundreds and thousands died from that totally toxic medication? My friends who continued taking it were dead within 6 months. Those who took themselves off it returned to health. Subsequent trials (such as the Concorde trial) showed that it was useless. Double and Triple combination therapy followed from that.

    1. My understanding is that it was Nick Partridge who agreed a monetary deal with Glaxo to prescribe AZT to THT’s clients at the time, hastening the death for many in the process? Again, for Partridge to be claiming a share of the credit earned by the true HIV prevention pioneers is shameful.

      W6_Bloke, where have you been hiding? It may have been kept quiet on Pink News for whatever reason, but the House of Lords’ summing up of the failures of the HIV charity sector where prevention is concerned made the mainstream news.

      And couldn’t it be for the very reason that prevention funds have been unfairly apportioned that the Status site has not been updated? I do not know Peter Scott and I certainly have never met him, but your comments, frankly, are libellous and I would be tempted to sue if I were him.

      With the support of Mark Ames et al this World AIDS Day we should see more realistic HIV campaigns again. At least Status’s focus is still on prevention and not 100% on HIV testing.

      1. What I would like to know is “who are Status?” and in what way do they focus on prevention? Only two ads were produced this year and as I say the website is to coin a phrase “woefully inadequate”.

        The second ad that was produced was full in inaccuracies and the incorrect use of statistics to produce a “harder hitting message”. This particular ad was not endorsed by 56 Dean Street as is was not in keeping with current views on HIV.

        I am very surprised you do not know who Peter Scott is as your comments and ideology are from the same stable, so if I were you I would seek him out and help him in his ” think tank and mass movement” approach.

        It is very interesting that Mr Scott has made a career out of the HIV sector, yet you Samuel have very little regard for others who have also dedicated their time to HIV charities. Mr Scott I believe has his own agenda here which is very secretive and is far from transparent. I have asked several times about who are the members of Status and……

        1. ….what is their experience in health promotion specifically in relation to HIV. The only reason I know Peter Scott is involved in Status, is because I dared to question his advertising tactics in an email feedback invitation, only to get a very rude and somewhat paranoid response from him.

          In my experience Status are not in the business of engaging with HIV positive individuals, despite the words detailed on their website – the phrase “actions speak louder than words” springs to mind. Peter Scott has trawled himself around the local news rooms criticising the very organisations he worked with and help set up since the beginning of the HIV pandemic, yet we have seen very little action on the ground to date, plenty of hot air but no effective actions.

        2. Samuel
          Can you substantiate your comment about THT actively prescribing AZT to its clients? I doubt this very much as the only individual that can prescribe any medication in the UK is a fully trained Doctor. Your obsession with THT and the pharma companies is always ever present Samuel!

          Also I should like to confirm that the survey you referred to with regard to harder hitting campaigns in another thread was indeed commissioned by Garry Leigh author of “Killing Us Softly” who you copy most of your words and ideology from. This is why I have a problem with your point of view, that it is irrational and is copied from other commentators, and bears no resemblance to current HIV science and medicine today.

          1. W6_Bloke, you really do take the biscuit. The THT/AZT scandal was covered in the free London paper Capital Gay and also made the national press at the time I clearly recall.

            Ah yes, Killing Us Softly, Garry Leigh’s expose on the failure of HIV prevention a while back that the HIV sector trolls couldn’t pull apart because it had been so robustly researched. And that was followed up by gay press everywhere coming out of the woodwork and carrying similar exposes. Perhaps it even provided the momentum that led to Status being formed, who knows?

            The fact is, W6_Bloke, the cat is out of the bag and endless forums have proven that PC-obsessed nutters running HIV prevention today refuse to relax their blind spot and step into line with consensus opinion. That is why steps are underway to relinquish the HIV charity sector’s grip on HIV prevention and to get back to basics.

            W6_Bloke, you are the final thrashing of the dragon’s tail before it gasps its last, desperate breath, and you know it.

        3. Wow, Status have produced 2 effective HIV prevention ads this year – that’s precisely 2 more than your chums at THT have managed, isn’t it?

          Thanks to your flagging up of Status, I just spent a good hour digesting its web site for the first time and giving very positive responses to its surveys about said campaigns. Yes, their stats were a little eschew on ad two: it is in fact 15 years off an average lifespan, not 13 years, that those with newly-acquired HIV can look forward to, according to latest stats.

          I invite anyone to similarly take a look at http://www.statusprevention.com and find anything to suggest its approach won’t cut HIV rates in the long run. W6_bloke is a known HIV sector shill; anyone who is so willing to spread disinformation about a newly-formed entity that exists to preserve the health and well-being of our community can only be described as a deranged lunatic/psychopath.

          Your agenda’s all too clear W6_bloke, and as the House of Lords intimated your time’s almost up…

          1. PS: I would even proffer to suggest it is the likes of Peter Scott of Status, Matthew Todd and Paul Burston in Attitude magazine, Karl Riley in Boyz, Dr Christen Jessen…in fact all those who have condemned the HIV charity sector in recent years and steadily built up a momentum for change where HIV prevention is concerned – the subject last year reaching the House of Commons and only recently the House of Lords – who are evoking the spirit of those original HIV prevention pioneers depicted in We Were There.

            God help us all if gay men have to suffer another 30 years in ignorance at the hands of “charities” like THT who have created today’s dreadful, shameful toll of HIV infection and succeeded only in making its funders like Glaxo ever richer. Once again, how dare Nick Partridge implicitly compare the overall work of THT to its original founders. Under his watch THT has deviated from its original mission and has become a corrupted, shallow, self-serving version of its former self.

          2. As ever Samuel you are selective in your reading – I forget how many times I have said that I have no connections with any of the HIV charities – you have made this incorrect asssumption! Also I will not indulge you any further with the opportunity to peddle your crap on all matters relating to HIV and in particular the HIV charity sector. You clearly have an issue with both THT and GMFA – take your problem up with them directly rather than hijack every HIV related article on here – it is very tedious and boring, because most of the stuff you spout is shamefully plagiarised from others.
            I have no problem who holds the funding for HIV prevention campaigns – BUT as an HIV positive individual I will not be marginalised and stigmatised to satisfy the irrational fears and unscientific points of view that people of your ilk constantly peddle on sites like this. As for Status producing “effective campaigns” where is your evidence to support this……….

          3. ……..Status ran a couple of ads in Time Out & Boyz magazine, these are hardly effective campaigns at any stretch of the imagination. Has Status engaged with me & answered the many questions I had then I might have a little more respect for them, but from where I am sitting it seems to me that Status is a front for Peter Scott to grab a slice of the action – his inability to be transparent and open about his organisation has never filled me with any confidence. Most websites at least have a section about “who we are” or “about us” – this information is missing from the Status website, and despite many requests for this basic information I have only received paranoid rants which are remarkably not unlike your own rants on here Samuel.
            I have been accused by Status of being a THT employee – but this is totally inaccurate and even if I did happen to work for THT I am able to form my own opinions on HIV prevention stratgies, & I do not intend to take lectures from the “villiage idiot”!

          4. Then why the hell, “W6″, don’t you come out and reveal your identity instead of hiding behind a post code? To hurl hubris and insults in a manner synonymous with the blinkered way HIV carity sector personnel openly attack critics of their work and then deny you are an HIV sector shill and hide behind an absurd-sounding moniker is cowardice of the highest order.

            I have been posting on Pink News under my name for several years now on all matter of subjects, and admire the work of PN in that they do not appear to be in the greasy palm of the HIV industry and are prepared to put their neck on the line and publish revelatory ground-breaking exposes of the failures, intransigence, sleaze and corruption that goes hand in hand with being a pivotol HIV sector personnel today.

            That takes some courage – something that does not exist in the HIV prevention sector’s world of deceit, smokescreens and outright lies.

          5. Samuel all I can say is that true to form when cornered you always resort to playground tactics of deflection and spouting your assumptions about me as fact ” W6_bloke is a known HIV sector shill”. How is changing my identity on here going to somehow change my opinions, or your view on what I write here! You are far too entrenched in your argument with THT et al, & cannot understand that there are people like myself who take time to research & form an opinion on HIV prevention strategies & simply do not copy others. We are all entitled to our opinions but at least my opinion is based in scientific and medical fact, whereas your opinion seems to be based in the past & your only opinion is that THT et have not met your perception on prevention measures, which is obviously obscured by your consistant condemnation of the HIV charities. Be an activist and take it to them directly – do something constructive if you feel so strongly, oh yer and why not make a big donation to Status!!!!

          6. Jock S. Trap 16 Nov 2011, 9:18am

            Samuel B.

            Your ignorance is noted. Sadly it kills more people that any disease ever does!

          7. “…your opinion seems to be based in the past & your only opinion is that THT et have not met your perception on prevention measures…”

            Oh W6_bloke, do get your head out of the sand. You are so far behind with current events, aren’t you? Take a look at this utterly damning appraisal of HIV prevention to date that is published in a new Government report which I found on Status’s Facebook page (thanks for pointing me in their direction by the way – Peter Scott is a true community hero and a rare breed where gay men are concerned…).

            See, it’s not just me saying it – it is a subject that’s even being debated in Parliament!!! Status has done sterling work putting THT in the dock. My how Nick Partridge squirmed defending his charity’s appalling track record on ITV’s London Tonight a few months ago, true to form constantly using the word “complex” as a get-out clause for every accusation levelled at him and spouting how THT could do things can be done better but of course never does…

          8. …Here is the link to the Parliamentarian report:

            http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201012/ldselect/ldaids/188/18807.htm#a20

            If you read it properly, W6, you will see the criticism aimed at pre-Status HIV prevention charities is implicit and utterly damning. It reveals how THT operated as a cartel, commissioning another member within the CHAPS partnership of HIV-related charities which it, effectively, governed, to evaluate its own work.

            Yes, for years THT and Sigma colluded in the annual Gay Men’s Sex Survey. They spun and embellished the results to flatter THT and find reasons NOT to take appropriate preventive actions that just about everyone else with any sense saw was clearly required.

            All those THT press releases the likes of QX and Boyz were so quick to publish without question were merely PR pieces for the charity itself, aided and abetted by Sigma’s yes-men who are now forbidden from partaking in any further evaluation work for THT.

            Just how damning is THAT?

          9. Samuel

            As I have said I will not take lectures from the “village idiot” as you have been referred to….I have openly welcomed the HoL recommendations and I hope they will be implemented fully and not watered down. It s time for a step change to educate the general population about HIV so that ignorant people like you are unable to peddle irrational fears and poorly informed arguments as fact.

            I get the impression that you are a man full of irrational fear, who refuses to take ownership for your own sexual health and need others to do it for you – stop bleating on about HIV charities protecting the gay community from HIV, gay men need to do that themselves, its called being responsible for our own actions – simples!

      2. And how exactly are gay men meant to do that for themselves when they are not being told what HIV is and WHY they need to protect themselves from it? THAT is the job of the HIV charities you stuttering idiot!

        May I suggest you approach Peter Scott yourself and suggest the next Status HIV ad campaign be based around HIV-related dementia, perhaps offering yourself as a real life example?

        I don’t mean that with any disrespect, W6, but it genuinely sounds like you are not able to follow the plot or to be able to reason in an adult-like fashion. And you do speak without applying logic to your arguments and end up making little sense…

        1. That is your problem Samuel you are disrespectful because you constantly hijack anything related to HIV and then carry on with your clap trap about HIV charities and pharma companies. You are the village idiot and not so harmless either with your poorly informed and paranoia about HIV…………..you are the one who needs to be educated not me fella – this has been evident in all the comments threads you tend to contribute to, just utter clap trap and rubbish – now on that note I have better things to do with my time than waste it on “the local village idiot” as you have been so rightfully named. Perhaps you should consider an identify name change, I thin k village idiot actually suits you perfectly!

          Get a grip, educate yourself and stop wasting my and others time with your out of date and irrational views on HIV and people living with HIV – enough of feeding the troll from me!

    2. “We owe a great deal to the activists like ACT-UP who insisted that the totally toxic AZT was released for use without proper trials.”

      Forgive me if I would like to see a study and mortality statistics from a verifiable source before I believe this, as the reality is that the paucity of alternatives for treating AIDS affected the risk/benefit ratio, with the certain mortality of HIV infection outweighing the risk of drug toxicity.

      1. The critics of compassionate access have forgotten the historical context of demands to speed the drugs approval process.
        The drugs trials process was incredibly slow. Years and years, we needed something that had efficacy as distinct from the quackery of extracts of egg yolk extracts, electrotherapy and faith based ‘cures’. PLWHAs were dying at a phenomenal rate with no treatments available. Pressing for the early release of AZT was the only ethical position.

        I would not be alive today if it wasn’t for AZT. It was a relatively weak antiretroviral and the initial dosing recommendations were too high but it also provided many of us long term survivors with 6 months or more buffering from the decimation that HIV caused.

        There were some interesting work-arounds by PLWHAs to the issues of 50% placebo wings in the AZT test trials, In Melbourne Australia for example participants pooled their pills, mixed them in a bucket and redistributed the mixed active drugs and placebos.

    3. Joe

      I am sorry that many of your friends died as a result of the early HIV pandemic, and it is now recognised that AZT was given at very toxic levels and caused all manner of problems for those people that took it. For many at that point is was either try the drug that was available or die as a result of the opportunisitc infections as they took hold.
      I think you also have to look at the information that was available at the time – everyone was working in the dark when it comes to HIV, and even today this complex virus still evades the development of a successful vaccine and erradication from the bodies of those infected by it.

      30 years on we could learn a great deal from those activists who worked together to bring about change, and if there is such a thing as a “gay community” then pitting positive and negative gay men against each other will not help anyone and just adds to the fear and stigma associated with HIV – it really should not be like this in 2011!

  7. Here is a short film which provides a balanced view on HIV 30 years on since the virus was discovered. The film demonstrated the anguish of having a positive test result but also provides narrative from people living with HIV – as you will see this reflects the current situation which for the majority of HIV positive individuals means they can get on and enjoy life!

    Here is the link http://youtu.be/FXguVQIVARw

    I have no affiliation with the charity mentioned at the end, but jurst wanted to share this short film.

    1. Wow, what a lot of strong opinions here….

      Thanks for the references W6 – will check them out.

      Samuel, if you want to live in a world where fear, shame and stigma are back in fashion, go ahead and make that donation to Peter Scott’s HIV prevention front. Innacurate stats and no committment to campaigns at the expense of others is a worrying state of affairs.
      As for what gay men need well… thats another question… gay men are one of the most over-served groups I have ever been part of! If you don’t know about HIV, you must have been in a cave. What do you want?

      If you want accurate, non-stigmatising campaigns, based on the best evidence I’d suggest stick with Sigma – who are conssumate professionals as far as i can tell. If only you knew what you were going on about…I’m no huge fan of THT, although I respect them, but seriously, aren’t these our activists now with jobs? They are as far as I can tell, passionate, proffessional people who won’t scare monger for a living..

      1. Hey there SJ good to see someone else with a common sense approach – but be ready to be described as a “PC HIV zealot” or “an HIV sector shill”. I don’t think even Sigma are safe from the misguided views of Samuel, & I would also like to add that the beloved Peter Scott was one of the founders of GMFA so heavily criticised by Samuel……not sure how he is going to square that one.

        I think one of the problems that certain gay men have with THT et al is that HIV has been “de-gayed” and the hard done by “gay community” feel that this has resulted more infections amongst gay men. This echoes your comment SJ “gay men are one of the most over-served groups I have ever been part of!” HIV has no boundaries and it is only right that organisations should be more generic in prevention messages.

        Samuel in his selective reading does not recognise that the recent HoL report cites stigma as a real barrier to increased testing rates……….

      2. …….and late diagnosis of HIV. It would appear that he is more than happy to see the level of HIV related death associated with late diagnosis to increase. Other than HIV charities putting condoms on for gay men Im really not sure what some individuals expect. There is plenty of clear easy to read information on the net, but this is also sadly interspersed with myths peddled as facts, something that is very dangerous in my view. Whilst being HIV positive can have its challenges for some individuals if we strip it right back what is HIV???

        It’s a piece of unwanted genetic material that has become embedded predominantly in the CD4 immune system cells, and there are plenty of illnesses that are caused by genetic abnormalities……..yet they are not feared and stigmatised like HIV! If I wanted to be really contraversial some of these genetic illnesses are passed on from parents to their off-spring, which also involves a sex act to take place!

        I await to be shouted down yet again!!!!!

  8. Interesting debate in this thread between those who support the programmes of the UK’s HIV charities and those who believe those charities are ineffective gravy-trains.

    Just as in San Francisco 1000s of gay men were INCENSED at the plan to close the gay saunas, despite the AIDS crisis, because it would ruin their fun, so today many gay men in London are INCENSED by the suggestion that the sex-industries should be closed down.

    The UK’s HIV charities have tried to merge their safe-sex message campaigns with the profiteering of the sex-industries.

    Consequently the UK’s HIV charities are guilty of simultaneously fostering UNsafe sex (through sex-industry promotions) and promoting safe sex (through campaigns which do not dare to challenge the sex industries).

    And so the HIV rate in this country rises.

    It’s all about making money. The HIV charities lack the teeth or moral conviction to halt the profiteering of the UK’s sex industries.

    1. Well said Peter M. Spot on. Hole in one. Follow the money trail. That is what HIV is all about these days; a massive industry supported by ever increasing seroconversions dependent on its services and pharma drugs.

      The HIV industry has become too huge to fall, which it would do if infection rates were seriously being tackled with effective education and hard hitting prevention messages.

      This is not rocket science, afterall, though to listen to HIV sector apologists like W6 and Jock you could even begin to think that maybe, just maybe the in-bed-with-the-pharmaceuticals HIV sector really did give a damn about safeguarding the health and well-being of gay men.

      Erm, not!!!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all