GMHC ANNOUNCES CAMPAIGN TO ENCOURAGE HIV ANTIBODY TESTING

By John Lauritsen

New York Native 28 Aug. 1989

On August 15 Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) held a press conference to publicize "an expanded campaign to encourage more voluntary HIV-testing among the estimated 180,000 to 360,000 HIV- infected New Yorkers". (The logic of their press release state- ment is elusive: How and why target for testing only those who will end up testing "positive"?)

GMHC's campaign will feature advertisements in the print media and radio, as well as "educational and support services for people considering HIV testing and for those who have tested positive."

In the past GMHC urged gay men not to take the test. Richard Dunne, Executive Director of GMHC, gave two reasons for the change in policy: New York State now has a "strong law which pro- tects people's confidentiality", and "We also have drugs which can prolong life by slowing the development of AIDS and prevent- ing some HIV-related illnesses."

Dunne stated: "Recent studies of the drug AZT have indicated that it works not only for people with AIDS but also for those who have symptomatic HIV infection but not AIDS." (This asser- tion was based on the National Institute of Allergy and Infec- tious Diseases [NIAID] study that was debunked in last week's Native [issue 331]).

In the question period, Native writer James D'Eramo and AIDS activist Michael Petrelis raised the issue of payment. What was the point in getting people to be tested if they couldn't afford the treatments?

AZT is a issue, since a bulleted point in the GMHC print ad refers to: "Drugs such as AZT that can slow development of AIDS." Petrelis mentioned that AZT damages the bone marrow and cannot be tolerated by 50% of patients. To this Dunne replied that 50% can tolerate the drug.

When called on I said that there was no scientifically cred- ible evidence that AZT "can slow development of AIDS", least of all the NIAID study, and that before urging people to take such a terribly toxic drug, GMHC had better be sure of its benefits. I asked Dunne how much money Burroughs Wellcome, the manufacturer of AZT, had contributed to GMHC. Dunne said he didn't know the exact amount, and avowed that all of the Burroughs Wellcome money goes to AIDS services, and "not a cent to salaries or operating expenses".

My final question was whether HIV-positive individuals coun- seled by GMHC would be informed that cancer was a expected conse- quence of taking AZT. (Harvey Chernov, the FDA analyst who in 1986 reviewed the toxicology data on AZT -- and who recommended that AZT not be approved for marketing -- wrote that AZT "induces a positive response in the cell transformation assay" and is therefore "presumed to be a potential carcinogen.") Dunne said that if AZT was a carcinogen, it would be up to the FDA to do something.

The most fundamental question was never broached: Why test for HIV antibodies? HIV is not the cause of AIDS. *