The quasi-religious nature of the debate is evident in the loathing and pious moralizing expressed toward Duesberg by an unnamed Berkeley scientist, interviewed by Celia Farber for her 2006 book, Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS: “He did it to himself, you know. You see, he wouldn’t give up an idea. He went at it with a hammer. He may well be 3,000 percent right, but he upset an awful lot of people. . . . Nobody believed in him because what he was doing was overturning generally held views. They felt betrayed. . . . You don’t just stand up and say everybody is wrong.”
