To the editor:

I was taken aback by the article "Irresponsible Reporters" which was Mark Wainberg's answer to a complex debate in the field of AIDS/HIV treatment and research.

Certainly Wainberg is entitled to his position, but the Reporter was acting like "Irresponsible Reporters" by not at least going beyond Wainberg's own position and investigating the other side.

On what basis, besides Wainberg's say so, can the Reporter dismiss the critics as uninformed and fringe? I think that it is the responsibility of the Reporter to examine the other position and see who is arguing it and why.

Otherwise, your article can be seen as little more than a public relations pitch to protect the interests of one of McGill's researchers. I would have thought that a university newspaper should be more than that.

Eric Shragge,
Associate Professor
School of Social Work

I should have outlined the arguments of those who don't believe HIV causes AIDS. I still think it's accurate to write "medical researchers are virtually unanimous in pinpointing HIV as the cause of AIDS." Indeed, the sceptics of the HIV/AIDS connection complain about this (science journalist Nicholas Regush, for instance). Some of these sceptics are reputable scientists -- among them, according to the Globe and Mail, Nobel laureate Kary Mullis. The headline "Irresponsible Reporters" was intended to convey Wainberg's view, not our own.