Peter Duesberg - Academic Misconduct Investigation

Academic Misconduct Investigation

In 2009, Duesberg and co-authors including David Rasnick published an article in the journal Medical Hypotheses, which is not peer reviewed. The article had been rejected previously by the journal JAIDS, and a peer reviewer had warned that the authors could face scientific misconduct charges if the paper were published.

The reviewers claimed that Duesberg and his co-authors cherry-picked data, cited favorable results while ignoring unfavorable results, and quoted statements out of context. Moreover, they claim that Duesberg " a serious breach of professional ethics" by failing to state a possible conflict of interest: That co-author Rasnick previously worked for Matthias Rath, a vitamin entrepreneuer who sold vitamin pills as AIDS remedies. The article was not revised in response to these criticisms.

In the article, Duesberg questioned research reporting that drugs policies implemented by the South African government on the advice of Duesberg, Rasnick and others had led to excess AIDS deaths. Observing that the overall population of South Africa has increased, Duesberg claimed that HIV must be a harmless "passenger virus" that has not caused deaths in South Africa or elsewhere. Duesberg stated that HIV does not replicate in the body and that antiviral drugs, which he calls "inevitably toxic", do not inhibit HIV. In addition, Duesberg wrote that neither he nor his co-authors had financial conflicts of interest.

Scientists expressed concerns to Elsevier, the publisher of Medical Hypotheses, about unsupported assertions and incorrect statements by Duesberg. After an internal review and with a unanimous recommendation of rejection by five Lancet reviewers, Elsevier stated that the article was flawed and of potential danger to global public health. Elsevier permanently withdrew the Duesberg article and another AIDS denialist publication and asked that the editor of the journal implement a peer review process. Letters of complaint to the University of California, Berkeley, including one from Nathan Geffen of the South African Treatment Action Campaign (TAC), prompted university officials to open an inquiry into possible academic misconduct related to false statements and failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest.

The investigation was dropped in 2010, with University officials finding "insufficient evidence...to support a recommendation for disciplinary action." The investigation did not endorse Duesberg's article, and TAC's Geffen stated that "this finding does not exonerate Duesberg".