Business
Commentary: Farewell to Peter Duesberg, a godfather of scientific disinformation
It can hardly be disputed that science and medicine today are awash in disinformation.
It’s why respected scientists get physically assaulted and hauled before partisan committees in Congress to be smeared. It’s why childhood vaccine rates in some places are plummeting and measles is on the rampage across the country.
Therefore, it behooves us to look at the origins of this outbreak of politically manipulated pseudoscience. Nature has given us a peg, with the death Jan. 13 of former UC Berkeley scientist Peter Duesberg, at 89.
Peter Duesberg was an AIDS denialist. He is the precursor to contemporary denialists like RFK Jr., who brought AIDS denialism into the 21st century.
— Yale epidemiologist Gregg Gonsalves
At the dawn of research into what is now known as HIV/AIDS, Duesberg took the heterodox view that HIV was a harmless virus that had nothing to do with AIDS.
“That virus is a pussycat,” he said. He maintained that the cause of AIDS had to be found elsewhere, notably the lifestyles and drug habits of gay men. His claim motivated a phalanx of AIDS deniers, the forebears of the anti-vaccine militants today.
“Duesberg was a pioneer of disinformation on infectious disease,” says John P. Moore, professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medical College and the author of a devastating 1996 takedown in Nature of Duesberg’s claims.
Duesberg’s embrace of a dangerously wrong hypothesis to the point that it destroyed his career is almost a Shakespearean narrative.
The German native built a career in the U.S. as a brilliant virologist with significant discoveries to his credit and long had been revered among his colleagues. But that ended when he entered the HIV wars. By 1996, Richard Horton, then the editor of the Lancet, the British medical journal, could marvel: “He is now perhaps the most vilified scientist alive.”
Some of the adversaries against whom he leveled ad hominem attacks — he accused Anthony S. Fauci, the respected immunologist and long-term director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, of committing mass murder by promoting the use of the highly toxic drug AZT against HIV — could barely hear his name without suffering apoplectic fits. AZT remains part of standard HIV therapies and is estimated to have saved or prolonged millions of lives.
Asked by science journalist William Booth to respond to a Duesberg statement, Robert Gallo, the co-discoverer of HIV, replied, “I cannot respond without shrieking.” Fauci derided Duesberg’s scientific claims as “absolute and total nonsense.”
But it would be a mistake to think that Duesberg’s baleful influence on medical science will end with his death.
Duesberg’s heirs are all around us. Actually, they’re more than that — they’re now in charge.
As secretary of Health and Human Services, Duesberg’s most highly placed follower, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is presiding over what has become an overtly anti-vaccination and anti-science agency with a stranglehold on government health policy and funding.
“Peter Duesberg was an AIDS denialist,” says Gregg Gonsalves, a Yale epidemiologist who was active in the AIDS research community starting in the 1990s. “He is the precursor to contemporary denialists like RFK Jr., who brought AIDS denialism into the 21st century.”
Indeed, Kennedy has embraced the denialist position that HIV is not the cause of AIDS: In a 2023 interview with New York magazine, Kennedy attributed the conclusion that HIV and AIDS were inextricably linked to “phony, crooked studies to develop a cure that killed people,” referring to AZT.
In his 2021 book “The Real Anthony Fauci,” Kennedy highlighted Duesberg’s depiction of Fauci as an all-powerful scientific panjandrum intent on blocking his grant applications because his findings might be costly for Fauci’s patrons, Big Pharma.
Kennedy also picked up Duesberg’s broader brief against government science agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Duesberg’s claim was that the CDC existed only to drum up medical emergencies so the NIH could solve them, ensuring the continued flow of taxpayer dollars into both agencies.
Starting in the mid-1970s, Duesberg asserted and Kennedy quoted, “‘the CDC increasingly needed a major epidemic’ to justify its existence.”
Kennedy added his own gloss: “Drumming up public fear of periodic pandemics was a natural way for NIAID and CDC bureaucrats to keep their agencies relevant.”
One can draw a straight line from that statement to the unapologetic malevolence with which Kennedy treats the CDC and NIH, insinuating that they’re rife with corruption and conflicts of interest. I sought a comment from Kennedy about Duesberg’s influence on his thinking, but received no reply.
Because AIDS isn’t caused by a virus, Duesberg maintained, the antiviral drugs used as therapies were worse than the disease. He specifically targeted AZT, then as now a common component of AIDS therapies.
The publicity his claims received encouraged untold patients to refuse AZT, causing a toll that may number in the millions. Duesberg met with South African President Thabo Mbeki and chaired a South Africa conference on alternative AIDS theories in 2000, and influenced Mbeki to deny AZT treatments for South African patients. That policy contributed to more than 300,000 deaths from AIDS in that country alone.
“That’s his biggest legacy in terms of the death toll,” Moore says.
Duesberg’s intellectual journey points to an eternal question in science: At what point does a theory become so discredited and the empirical evidence against it so strong, that its advocates should be ignored?
For Duesberg, that point may have come in 1989, when he published an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences outlining his position in detail. The article was filled with with so many assertions about virus science that experienced virologists knew to be false that it “closed the book on him,” Moore told me.
But as Jon Cohen of Science magazine would observe, “the press was less skeptical.” Journalists saw Duesberg as an iconoclastic truth-teller because he carried “visible credentials,” as Gallo put it — after all, he was a professor at a leading research university and a member of the elite National Academy of Sciences.
The press feasted on Duesberg’s self-portrayal as the victim of ostracism arising from professional jealousies — a target of cancel culture before that was a thing. But it rang as false then as do those of RFK Jr.’s anti-science appointees who claim today to have been silenced for their unorthodox views while proclaiming their victimhood at university-sponsored symposiums and appearances on Fox News.
Duesberg’s position also appealed to “the unwary, desperate or gullible” with “twisted facts and illogical lines of argument,” Moore wrote in 1996.
He attracted followers eager to make their name by challenging the scientific consensus on HIV and AIDS.
One was Robert Willner, who had lost his medical license in Florida for claiming to have cured an AIDS patient by administering ozone. Willner went on the road with presentations that included his injecting himself with blood from an AIDS sufferer, as if to show that there was nothing to be feared from HIV. (Willner died in 1995 of a heart attack.)
In his 1989 article, Duesberg had insisted that the true cause of AIDS was drug use by abusers and nitrite poppers favored by homosexuals. AIDS had only been discovered and named, he wrote, because “the particular permissiveness toward these risk groups in metropolitan centers encouraged the clustering of cases that was necessary to detect AIDS.”
His advice was that AIDS prevention efforts should be “concentrated on AIDS risks rather than on transmission of HIV,” which — if followed — would have set AIDS research inexorably down the wrong path.
Duesberg kept making his argument well after evidence that the human immunodeficiency virus, HIV, causes AIDS became incontestable. It’s on that evidence that AIDS treatment is based today, with spectacular success — with proper treatment, an AIDS patient can live about as long as an uninfected individual. In the old days, an infection was a death sentence.
The memorial page posted by UC Berkeley after Duesberg’s death walked a tightrope in acknowledging his descent into infamy. In its first sentence, it labeled him as a “public controversialist,” a term new to me. It recounted, “In his later years, Peter enjoyed being a maverick and the center of controversy.”
But it candidly addresses the controversies he triggered by noting that his unorthodox stance “was amplified by political leaders to the detriment of public health.”
And it delivers a final verdict that “the scientific consensus is that HIV is indeed the primary cause of AIDS, and that the current suite of anti-retroviral agents is very effective in slowing or halting the progression of the disease and its spread in the population.”
Business
Video: Unraveling the Mystery Behind Bitcoin’s Creator
new video loaded: Unraveling the Mystery Behind Bitcoin’s Creator
By John Carreyrou, Sutton Raphael, James Surdam, Coleman Lowndes and Joey Sendaydiego
April 8, 2026
Business
Commentary: Exploring the moon while cutting NASA? Why Trump’s 2027 budget misfires
Trump’s budget proposal takes aim at programs that make Americans smarter, healthier and safer. What’s his real agenda?
The oldest, most enduring cliche about government policy is the one about how budgets are political, not fiscal, documents.
The Trump administration’s budget proposal for the 2027-28 fiscal year, unveiled Friday, seems designed to set a new standard for partisan ideology as a spending standard.
You may have seen news coverage of the budget’s top lines, which call for $1.5 trillion in defense spending next year and cuts totaling $73 billion in nondefense spending. But those figures fail to communicate the raw flavor of the budget cuts or how they’re described in the 92-page document.
It’s an extinction-level event for science.
— Casey Dreier, Planetary Society, on budget cuts at NASA
Nor do they provide perspective for the magnitude of the defense increase or the damage that would be wreaked upon crucial social programs.
The defense request, for instance, would be a 42% increase over the current year, but it might be better judged as what Todd Harrison of the pro-business American Enterprise Institute describes unhappily as “the highest level of funding for defense in US history, surpassing even the peak funding during World War II.”
Adjusted to today’s dollars, Harrison calculates, the World War II peak was a bit lower than $1.2 trillion.
The administration minimizes the overall budgetary effect of its spending plans by projecting average growth in gross national product at 3% annually over the next decade.
That’s an ambitious goal, to say the least. Over the last 25 years — that is, in this century — U.S. economic growth has reached or exceeded 3% in only three years, including a pandemic-era surge to 6.1% in 2021. Last year it was only 2.1%.
On the other side of the ledger, the nondefense budget would be cut by 10%. But programs the White House has specifically targeted for being contrary to its ideology would suffer far more devastating cuts. Some scientific programs, such those concerned with global warming or the social and economic implications of science, technology and healthcare policies would be slashed by more than 50%.
NASA may be enjoying a moment just now, as its Artemis II spacecraft rounded the far side of the moon Monday, preparatory to heading back to Earth in the first moonshot since Apollo 17 last landed men on the lunar surface in December 1972.
But Trump proposes slashing the agency’s budget by $5.6 billion, or 23%. It gets worse: Trump would cut NASA’s science division by $34 billion, or 47%, canceling more than 40 projects, of which about 20 are currently underway.
“It’s an extinction-level event for science,” Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at the Planetary Society, told Nature.
Among the programs facing extinction is NASA’s Office of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Engagement, which aimed to interest minority students in those so-called STEM disciplines.
“NASA will inspire the next generation of explorers through exciting, ambitious space missions,” the budget says, “not through subsidizing woke STEM programming and research that prioritizes some groups of students over others.”
The budget leaves unclear how those “exciting, ambitious space missions” will come to pass, since it also cuts $297 million from NASA’s annual spending on space technology.
The proposed cuts to science programs more generally would be devastating. The National Science Foundation, one of the most important scientific grant-making agencies in the world, would lose $4.8 billion, or 55% of its funding.
The language the budget uses to rationalize such cuts speaks volumes about the drivers of its draconian cuts in nondefense spending: It’s an expression of Trumpian culture war hobby horses such as hostility to diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The term “woke” or its derivatives appear 32 times in the budget document — as many times as it appears in Project 2025, the far-right roadmap for a second Trump term published by the Heritage Foundation in 2023.
The $8.5 billion in proposed budget cuts to K-12 spending would include the elimination of the $70-million Teacher Quality Partnership, which the budget describes as a program to “train teachers … on divisive ideologies.”
Among those, the budget says, are “inappropriate and divisive topics such as Critical Race Theory, diversity, equity, and inclusion, social justice activism,” and “anti-racism.” Nothing in the document explains why any of those things are considered bad; the terms are merely shibboleths that Trump’s core audience is expected to accept as gospel.
Services for transgender individuals would take a major hit from the budget: Among the $204.5 million in Treasury Department funding for community development initiatives on the chopping block would be support for “gender extremism,” such as for clinics that provide “‘gender-affirming hormone therapy’ and other services to young patients.”
As I’ve reported, Trump has bought heavily into conservative attacks on gender-affirming care, including by spouting claims that I labeled in 2024 as “deranged and despicable,” such as that schoolchildren are being kidnapped by school administrators and subjected to surgery against their will.
Perhaps the most concentrated assault in the proposed budget, as my colleague Hayley Smith reported, is the one aimed at research, development, and construction of renewable energy sources. The budget plan contains no fewer than 20 references to what it calls the “green new scam.”
This is an infantile reference to what’s typically known as the “Green New Deal,” a raft of policies incorporating a transition from fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal to renewables as well as the concept of “environmental justice,” meaning efforts to ensure that the transition doesn’t overly burden disadvantaged communities.
Trump has consistently called for more development of fossil sources, including a revival of coal despite its unrelenting and inevitable glide path toward extinction as a component of U.S. energy generation. The budget plan doubles down on this policy, calling renewables R&D a “leftist” ideology. This is tied to policies “opening up more Federal land and waters for oil, gas, and clean coal development,” the document says. (“Clean coal,” which is to say nonpolluting coal, is a myth, as I’ve reported.)
The budget plan pays tribute to another Trump obsession, the supposed evils of wind power. Cuts to the Interior Department budget would “put a stop to disastrous offshore wind energy projects that harm hardworking coastal communities, precious wildlife, and American military readiness.” None of these assertions about wind power is supported by reality.
Some cuts appear to reflect a determination to exact retribution from agencies that have thwarted cherished conservative goals. The National Institutes of Health, a consistent target of conservative budget-cutters, would lose $5.9 billion, or 12.5% of its budget. That would include major cuts to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which was formerly headed by the respected immunologist Anthony Fauci.
The budget drafters couldn’t resist taking a swipe at Fauci, who has been the target of smears from Republicans who have tried to blame him, absurdly, for the COVID pandemic. The budget document accuses Fauci of steering government funds to the Wuhan (China) Institute of Virology, which it called “the likely source of the COVID-19 pandemic.”
There’s no compelling evidence that a laboratory was a source of the virus, as I’ve documented: The overwhelming weight of scientific judgment is that the virus reached humans from natural zoologic sources. The budget plan resurrects the long-debunked conspiracy theory that Fauci orchestrated a 2020 scientific paper that judged the lab-leak theory to be “improbable.” The budget drafters assert that Fauci (who retired in 2022) “commissioned” the paper, which is simply untrue.
Another theme percolating through the budget plan is the need to protect our wealthiest taxpayers from, well, taxes. The budget would cut $1.4 billion from the budget of the Internal Revenue Service, reversing a restoration of the agency’s enforcement capabilities undertaken during the Biden administration. Trump cut IRS staffing by 20,000, or 27%. The document asserts that the IRS “has been weaponized against the American people, small businesses, and non-profit organizations.”
According to the Yale Budget Lab, every dollar the IRS spends on audits yields more than $7 in returns. Plainly that’s not coming from average Americans, but from the upper crust.
None of this means that the budget proposal isn’t valuable, to an extent. It’s a convenient one-stop window into Trump’s personal fixations: the elimination of “radical gender and racial ideologies that poison the minds of Americans,” the horrors of “the globalist climate agenda,” the “invasion” of violent criminals from abroad, and so on. In other words, there’s nothing new under the Trumpian sun.
Business
Hypersonic aircraft company moves headquarters from Atlanta to El Segundo
Aerospace startup Hermeus is moving its headquarters to El Segundo from Atlanta as it aims to build autonomous hypersonic aircraft for the military, the latest sign of revival in the region’s aerospace and defense sectors.
The company, valued at $1 billion, is opening executive offices and a facility where it will design and build its next prototype, a supersonic plane intended to hit Mach 3 — faster than any modern warplane.
The company’s goal is to eventually develop a hypersonic plane reaching Mach 5, or five times the speed of sound, and Southern California has the engineering talent base to help achieve that, executives said.
“Building a lot of aircraft developmentally very quickly, doing iterative developments, it really doesn’t exist anywhere out in the world other than SpaceX — and we’ve recruited a lot of talent from there over the years,” said co-founder and Chief Executive AJ Piplica, a Georgia Tech alumnus.
“We’re now at a point in the company’s trajectory where we are scaling what the team can do,” he added.
-
Share via
Elon Musk founded SpaceX in El Segundo 24 years ago and later moved its operations to Hawthorne, where the company still maintains a large campus despite relocating its headquarters to Texas in 2024.
El Segundo and other South Bay cities have witnessed explosive growth in recent years, with scores of startups in aerospace and defense tech — many founded by former SpaceX employees.
Hermeus announced its move Tuesday at the same time it disclosed its latest $350-million funding round, which it said values the company at $1 billion.
The round was led Khosla Ventures, founded by prominent Silicon Valley venture capitalist Vinod Khosla. Other participants included billionaire Peter Thiel‘s Founders Fund.
Sam Altman, the CEO and co-founder of OpenAI, led a prior $100-million funding round in 2022. The company said it has now raised $500 million in equity and debt.
Hypersonic planes and weapons are at the cutting edge of military research and development. China and Russia have developed the weapons, which are viewed as strategic threats, with Russia deploying them in Ukraine.
Missile development also is taking place in the United States, including at legacy defense contractors Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, as well as Torrance startup Castelion.
Hermeus is developing supersonic and hypersonic aircraft that are not only autonomous but also reusable, like any modern jet. The aircraft would have multiple uses, including as a strike fighter, conducting reconnaissance and transporting cargo.
“What we are building here is not just an airplane, it is a platform,” Piplica said.
The company, founded in 2019, flew its first prototype, Quarterhorse Mk 1, in May 2025 during a short low-speed flight at Edwards Air Force Base in the Mojave Desert.
Hermeus’ headquarters in El Segundo. The aerospace firm has begun moving into its 67,000-square-foot offices and will take full occupancy early next year.
(Hermeus)
It flew its first second aircraft in February at Spaceport America over White Sands Missile Range airspace in New Mexico. The Quarterhorse Mk 2.1 plane is three times larger than the initial prototype and about the size of an F-16. The goal is to reach supersonic speeds.
Hermeus plans to continue testing aircraft at the isolated missile range, where it can fly faster while not endangering structures or anyone on the ground.
Since 2021, the firm has operated out of a 110,000-square-foot facility in Atlanta, where it has its offices as well as design and production operations.
It will retain the site and use the entire space for production.
Georgia is the home of multiple aerospace manufacturing facilities, including Northrop Grumman.
“That talent base [in Georgia] is extremely aligned to large-scale aerospace manufacturing. Prototyping is a whole different world — different skill sets, different capabilities,” said Piplica, who had been an executive at Atlanta hypersonic research company Generation Orbit before co-founding Hermeus.
The aerospace firm has begun moving into its 67,000-square-foot offices at 888 North Douglas St. in El Segundo and will take full occupancy early next year. The Southern California operation will employ more than 200 people by next year, adding hundreds more in the coming years, executives said. Hermeus currently employs about 300.
The company is currently building its third Quarterhorse aircraft, which it expects will fly faster than Mach 2, in the Atlanta facility. It is expected to fly later this year. The fourth Quarterhorse will be built in El Segundo — with the goal of hitting Mach 3. It should fly next year with the military showing interest in a plane flying at that speed, Piplica said. .
Its hypersonic plane, designed for defense and national security missions, is farther off and dubbed the Darkhorse. Reaching Mach 5 involves the use of a so-called ramjet, which is similar to a traditional jet engine but doesn’t have any moving parts.
Hermeus does engine testing in Jacksonville, Fla., and has engineering offices in Hawthorne that it plans to retain.
In El Segundo, it’s leasing space in two buildings in a 30-acre complex Hackman Capital Partners acquired from Northrop Grumman in 2017 and spent $100 million making over into modern offices.
The complex includes the West Coast offices of L’Oreal USA, the headquarters of alternative protein company Beyond and labs that El Segundo aerospace company Varda Space Industries recently subleased from Beyond.
El Segundo Mayor Chris Pimentel said the city helped market the Hermeus space.
“We spoke loudly about the opportunity over there for a couple different players. I thought frankly that Hermeus had passed us by and that they were going to stay in Atlanta, so we’re delighted,” he said.
The city counts more than 40 aerospace and tech companies as having headquarters or major operations in El Segundo. In addition to contractors Boeing and Northrop Grumman, they include startups Picogrid and Sift. There are other companies, including suppliers.
-
Atlanta, GA4 days ago1 teenage girl killed, another injured in shooting at Piedmont Park, police say
-
Movie Reviews6 days agoVaazha 2 first half review: Hashir anchors a lively, chaos-filled teen tale
-
Culture1 week agoDo You Know Where These Famous Authors Are Buried?
-
Georgia1 day agoGeorgia House Special Runoff Election 2026 Live Results
-
Pennsylvania2 days agoParents charged after toddler injured by wolf at Pennsylvania zoo
-
Entertainment7 days agoInside Ye’s first comeback show at SoFi Stadium
-
Milwaukee, WI2 days agoPotawatomi Casino Hotel evacuated after fire breaks out in rooftop HVAC system
-
Indianapolis, IN6 days agoFighting Illini begin Final Four preparations in Indianapolis