Kansas City IMC : http://kcindymedia.org/newswire/display/3214/index.php
Kansas City IMC

Interview :: [none]

Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

An interview with Kim Marie Bannon from Kansas who is taking the HIV test manufacturer's to court in a consumer protection case.
kim bannon3.mp3 (8192 k)
Kim Marie Bannon, positive in the HIV test for 13 years and taking the HIV test manufacturer’s to court in Kansas.
Using the 4ZZZ radio interview booth on Friday 22nd July , 2005. Brisbane, Australia.

Cal Crilly- I’m speaking to Kim Marie Bannon from Wichita in Kansas who started a court case against the HIV test back in April of 2004, is that right?
Kim Marie Bannon- That’s right.
CC- And how’s it been going?
KB- Well, nothing’s really happened on the case in all this time. The attorneys that I’ve hired just have not progressed.
CC- You basically had attorneys that have pulled out each time when you wanted to bring it through to court, is that right?
KB- That’s basically what’s happened. The case is under an Act, which is called the ‘Kansas Consumer Protection Act’ and it’s basically a fraud case.
It concerns false advertising of a product, an HIV test, which is supposed to be able to tell you if you are infected with a Human Immunodeficiency Virus. But when you get the package inserts that come with the test, that is actually never seen by the consumer, the package that the tests are in are opened at a lab somewhere by a technician where they send your blood off to, and the package insert that’s inside this test has various disclaimers depending on which test your speaking of, that say things like this test can’t really tell you whether you have HIV or not.
CC- And you’ve tested HIV positive for how long now?
KB- Over 13 years, It was May 1 of 1992.
CC- And no symptoms at all?
KB- Very healthy all this time, no drugs, even not so much as an aspirin since 1995.
CC- So, is this why you’re a bit angry?
KB- Actually, I filed the lawsuit not as an act of vengeance or justice on my own behalf because at that time no one knew, when I found out about this fraud, it was 10 years later. So it was in 2002, almost 10 years to the date, and it was April 18 of 2002, and when I found out about these disclaimers in the test kits, and I also found out about a whole bunch of holes in HIV and AIDS science that started making more sense to me than what I’d been told all along about AIDS and HIV. And I researched this and eventually got a hold of some of these package inserts and satisfied myself it was true, and that research was undertaken at first by me just for my own health because even though I had been well for 10 years I still thought I was just a lucky one.
That it was still going to be pharmies and AIDS symptoms and I would get sick and die from AIDS at a young age.
CC- Who have you got to testify in the court case?
KB- Well, Rodney Richards is the lead expert in the case and myself, although since it’s a Consumer Protection Act case I don’t really know that we need an expert.
You know people, if this is the first time they’re hearing this, if they woke up this morning thinking HIV caused AIDS, that’s because of what they see in the media, that’s because AIDS tests, HIV tests are constantly pushed on people.
“Knowing is beautiful”, that’s what the advertisements say, and we’re led to believe that we can be told with certainty whether we have HIV or not with a blood test or a urine test, now there are saliva tests and we are told that these tests are certain.
And that you can’t tell by looking at anyone whether they have HIV or not, that you have to have this test in order to know. But you get the package insert and you find out that some of them blatantly say this test is not to be used for the diagnosis or the confirmation of the diagnosis of HIV, I mean it’s that blatant. Some of them say that if you test negative it doesn’t mean you don’t have HIV, some of them say if you test positive it doesn’t mean you do have HIV and you should confirm this test, but there’s no test that says it can be used to confirm.
So, I can’t remember what you asked me, if I’m going off track.
CC- Who, is it Rodney Richards, did you say?
KB- Yes, Rodney Richards, who was one of the founders of Amgen laboratories and has since finding out about this fraud, left Amgen and he spends his time trying to educate people about the hazards of HIV testing.
CC- That’s a brave thing to do.
KB- Yes.
CC- And have you got any other support from people for doing this?
KB- I’ve gotten lots of support, in fact as time has gone on, I’ve lost an attorney or gotten another one, I’ve even been encouraged to just take the case to court without an attorney and do it all on my own. I’ve contacted at least 50 attorneys.
I should give you a little bit of my background, I’ve worked in the court system my entire life and I’m a very respected member of the local legal community in Wichita, Kansas where I live. So these 50 attorneys that I’ve contacted, most of them are my friends and I’ve gotten lots of free legal advice and they say “wow, Kim, you’re really taking on people who’ve got a lot of money and this is scary and you’re sure you want to do that” and they’re scared.
I mean, they say, “yeah, it’s probably a good case but I don’t want to touch that”.
The lawyers just don’t, I don’t want to say that they don’t have a conscience but they have families and they have reputations and they have niches where they normally work and certain kinds of cases, and they get into a rhythm of their practice and a case like this just doesn’t fall into what they normally do and how they make their living and although they’re my friends and they wish me well, they’re just not interested in..
You know, we’re used to seeing Hollywood depictions of attorneys and these big cases and all lawyers are after the limelight, I mean that’s just not it at all, that’s not the real world. I mean most lawyers are making a decent living doing their run of the mill cases and they’re happy with that.
So, it’s not so surprising that no one wants to take on a case like this.
CC- Is there any chance of it becoming a class action case?
KB- Well, that’s what I was starting to say a minute ago was this wasn’t for myself that I brought this case, I do hope it can become a class action because this isn’t about Kim Bannon and a false positive test result or wrongful test result or an erroneous test result. This is about the whole world and the things that are shaping our thoughts and people are suffering from this. Even if you don’t think you know anyone that has HIV or AIDS or you have no risk yourself or people that you know aren’t at risk, what you need to think about is how much money or spending on this, 160 billion dollars in US funds have been spent and we have no cure, we haven’t saved one life and this is the result of a flawed hypothesis. I mean how can ever expect to solve what’s causing AIDS if you start with a flawed hypothesis and that’s what’s going on and we’re spending all of this money and other countries are spending a lot of money and people are terrorised. Maybe you’re happy yourself, maybe you’ve been in a monogamous relationship or you’re just not worried, that maybe you have children or fears, or maybe you’re staying in a monogamous relationship that you’d rather get out of but you’re thinking HIV is out there, I’d better just stay with the person I’m with because we haven’t given each other anything yet.
I challenge anyone listening to me right now, to say that a thought about AIDS being out there hasn’t influenced some decision that you’ve made in your life in some way.
And if you’re diagnosed with HIV and you have a positive HIV test result it affects every decision that you make for the rest of your life.
So, the lawsuit is mostly for the people who have gotten an HIV positive test but it’s really for everyone.
CC- What’s the next plan in the court case?
KB- Well, on August 3, which is a little over a week away, I’m going to the judge to ask him for more time to look for another attorney and to postpone some of the deadlines in what’s called the scheduling order, it’s a motion to modify the scheduling order where I will be representing myself and speaking with the judge to ask for more time to find another attorney.
CC- Alright, well, I might give you a call later on when something happens.

Add a new comment
Author Anonymous Poster
  Create a new account
Text Format


Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

For some more information about the case Kim Bannon has started, here's an article: Aids Test Unscientific: Test Kit Makers Sued in Kansas The test kits used to determine "HIV positive" status in patients are deeply flawed - they were developed on the basis of faulty scientific methodology and assumptions and are without value in determining whether a person suffers from "HIV Aids", alleges Kim Marie Bannon in a civil suit filed under the Consumer Protection Act of the State of Kansas, US...

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

I don't know if I'd call this an interview. You just pitched her a bunch of soft-ball questions, which doesn't make any sense to me considering that this case brings up some very important issues. And it's confusing that Ms. Bannon claims (in other statements) to have sold her house to pay for this case, yet from the sound of it she hasn't even found a lawyer yet. What has she spent all that money on if not attorney's fees? There are attorneys who have signed the Perth group's online statement, such as John Szczubelek, Gregory Maxim, Nadolyn Hankins, and Robert Jordan Funk. You can do a search for them at www.virusmyth.net/aids/statement/ -- some of them have email addresses and phone numbers listed. Surely one of them could be persuaded to take the case or at least help her find someone who would take the case, especially considering that if she wins, there could be a substantial payout. I just have a very hard time believing that she's having this much trouble finding a lawyer.

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

A gentleman identified only as "Brad" expressed doubt about Kim Bannon's veracity based on an observation that she had yet to obtain legal counsel. Well, Brad, you have a lot to learn. In this country, the practice of law is firmly entrenched in capitalism. The fact that a person cannot obtain legal counsel may well reflect the reluctance of attorneys to take a case where there is no guarantee of a reasonable profit. Kim Bannon's account should be evaluated on more objective criteria. Do yourself a favor, Brad, and read about the actual subject matter at hand. Thousands of scientists and other serious professionals are questioning the single-agent HIV causation theory of AIDS. Ms. Bannon is not alone. Lawyers are no different than other people in that they need to make enough money to pay their bills and feed their children. I am a public sector lawyer with a very modest income. If the opponents of the HIV theory of AIDS offered to pay me what I am making now, in salary and benefits, I would seriously consider working for the cause full time.

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

Thank you for your response, Mr. Szczubelek, if that is your real name ;). I'm not denying that money talks. Indeed, on her website she claims to have sold her house for $210,000, which she claims elsewhere was "to finance this lawsuit." Additionally, if this case is successful, it has the potential to result in a substantial punitive settlement. I just don't see how Ms. Bannon can claim that money is an obstacle without explaining those two things.

as for "doing myself a favor" and learning more about the actual subject matter, I am quite familiar with this subject matter. For one, a scientific paradigm (such as the theory that HIV causes AIDS) is never changed by simply "questioning" it. It takes research, and as of yet, I have seen no research that has supported the view held by Ms. Bannon. Dispite what some opponents of the HIV theory of AIDS might say, it is not enough to simply attack the research that has been done so far. New research must be done to test a new theory, and that theory must do a better job explaining what has been observed so far than does our current paradigm. Until that happens, the "HIV doesn't cause AIDS" crowd is just spinning their wheels.

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

Why would John F. Szczubelek not be my real name? Google it, if you don't believe me. At least I have the courage of my convictions and am not afraid to state my full name in this forum. Save your ad hominem attacks. They lend nothing to the credibility of your arguments. The fact that many eminent members of the scientific community, like Kary Mullis, Robert Root-Bernstein and Peter Duesberg, just to name a few, have "questioned" the HIV single agent causation hypothesis is more than enough justification to devote funding to alternate hypotheses. Their work is very readable. If you approach it with an open mind, you will be inclined to think less of the HIV hypothesis. The force of their arguments comes not from complex scientific analysis, but from pure logic. If the HIV hypothesis advanced in the mid 1980's were true, the epidemiological research would show a very different pattern for incidence of the diseases and symptoms associated with AIDS. Contrary to what you suggest, there is ample evidence to question, if not abandon, the HIV hypothesis. Unfortunately, government and drug companies are more interested in researching, manufacturing and selling simple magic bullet solutions than they are in exploring treatments and prevention methods that focus on multiple causes and lifestyle changes. You throw around the term "scientific paradigm," but it appears that you have not read or understood Thomas Kuhn's work on the subject. Scientific paradigms tend to outlive their usefulness due to the same kind of structural and institutional barriers that have allowed the HIV hypothesis to persist. Finally, what is the point of questioning Ms. Bannon's personal finances? That has nothing to do with the issue at hand and is a senseless personal attack on a person who doesn't deserve it.

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

Forgive my incredulity, Mr. Szczubelek. It just seemed like quite a coincidence that you would come across this obscure article just days after I mentioned your name. You have to admit it would be easy for someone else to come along and claim to be you. That is just one of the reasons I choose not to reveal my full name on boards such as this, which is my right. I feel that my arguments are fully capable of standing without my surname's support.

But none of that is important.

I never said I opposed the funding of researching alternate hypotheses of AIDS causation. By all means, I wish someone would do it so we could put an end to this so-called "debate." My whole point is that if AIDS is caused by something other than HIV it should be easy to prove, but so far the only "evidence" I have seen has come in the form of attacks on other people's research. I encourage the questioning of established theories, as should any good scientist, but simply questioning is not enough if a change is to take place.

I feel you are misconstruing my "attack" on Ms Bannon. My real critique is of Mr. Crilly, who missed the opportunity to answer questions like the one I had. Perhaps Ms Bannon has a perfectly reasonable answer to the question I have raised, but that question was never asked of her. That's where my complaint lies.

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

Dear Brad: I consider it highly unlikely that anyone would come along and claim to be me. Being an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Michigan is not a grand distinction, since there are hundreds of us, employed in various capacities. I persist in addressing this line of argumentation about a single agent AIDS hypotheses because the matter has grave medical, social, and economic ramifications.
My line of work entails the use of analytical problem solving skills, and such inquiries are imperative in examining the use of scientfic method in exploring AIDS. Brad makes the statement:

My whole point is that if AIDS is caused by something other than HIV it should be easy to prove, but so far the only "evidence" I have seen has come in the form of attacks on other people's research. I encourage the questioning of established theories, as should any good scientist, but simply questioning is not enough if a change is to take place.

Your first postulate is that "If something other than HIV causes AIDS it should be easy to prove...."

You have it exactly backward, Brad. Logic dictates that if several interdependent agents, in combination, cause AIDS, the process of hypothesis testing becomes geometrically harder. AS well, when additional agents that appear to contribute to the etiology of the disease are related to lifystyle, drug use, psychological pathologies and worst of all, affirmatively sanctioned "treatments" bearing the imprimater of powerful medical companies, the ability to conduct effective multivariate analysis of data is compromised. THe political resistance against testing non single agent AIDS hypotheses has been severe and violent.

Brad also laments that scientific views are being attacked and that such an approach is an ill-advised way to develop a workable hypothesis for the cause or causes of AIDS. If science is to work at all, it must exercise a destructive component that tests hypotheses to determine if they yield replicable and useful predictive results about the phenomena being studied.

When certain aspects of human nature intervene in the process, and are not accounted for, things like the "expectation principle" and "affirming the consequent" pervert the scientific process and contort test results to support hypotheses for reasons other than their objective predictive ability. One can begin with an ultra-simple hypothesis, create a test design easily manipulated and interpreted, and in a self-fulfilling prophecy clothed in the pseudo-religious trappings of modern science, reach a conclusion that was suggested in the first instance. IT is a case of nothing ventured, nothing lost. HIV causes AIDS because Heckler and Gallo said so. Anyone who disagrees must be a heretic. Unfortunately, the scientific medical community is very good at putting on "proofs" and formulating study conditions under which theories can be tested and reformulated to develop better hypotheses. However, as a social group of arbiters, they are not so effective at explaining to lay persons and the legal community the particulars of scientific studies examining what is good about good studies and bad about the bad. There are social scientists who believe that logical and scientific inference must be replicated in a forum such as a judicial proceeding, in order for the complex findings to be communicated and understood in a way that is helpful to society. AS Wittgenstein and others noted, philosophy is very much a process of translating representations about sense experience to others for the purpose of finding the common ability to make sense from commonly experienced phenomena. More later...

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

I just looked.
The media has full control of HIV/AIDS propaganda, I didn't have to bore everyone and ask the microscopic details about HIV.
There are thousands of articles and more on websites and forums that cover this.
My answer to causation of AIDS is simple, as long as HIV pushers stay in denial and ignore the other causes of AIDS it will still happen.
I wrote this here to shake everyone up, it will send you mad and was supposed to so people would stop taking this all for granted. Have a good day.
Why Bono and HIV/AIDS Inc. will be stopped. Irish Indymedia

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

buy wow gold lecteur mp3 mp4 player cheap wow gold mp3 mp4 sell wow gold mp4 player mp3 buy cheap wow gold mp4 mp4 player buy world of warcraft gold mp3 mp4 gold wow wow gold kauf wowgold wow po wow powerleveling wow powerleveling power leveling powerleveling wow power leveling

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

wow gold wow gold wow gold kaufen world of warcraft gold wow geld wow powerlevel wow gold wow wow gold wow gold kaufen serveur wow wow europe wow wow power leveling wow powerleveling wow gold mp3 players mp3 player wow gold paypal mp3 player zubehoer mp3 player wow power leveling mp3 mp4

Re: Kim Bannon Interview on HIV test court case

world of warcraft power leveling mp3 players mp3 player cheap wow power leveling mp3 players mp3 player cheap world of warcraft power leveling mp3 players mp3 player level wow wow po or wow wow lvl wow fr mp4 player level wow cheap mp3 players cheap mp3 player wow lvl mp3 mp4 player portabel mp3 player wow powerlevel mp3 player mp3 players


Account Login

From the Radicalendar

No events for this day.

view calendar week
add an event

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software

Page executed in 0.173530101776 seconds.
Loaded 61/73 class files. Read 31 objects from the database. Queried the database 8 times. Served 14 files from the cache.