I thought I made it clear that I choose this website for it's Biafran qualities and inalienable right..Freedom of speech. I also made it exclusively clear that I am not here to appease any yellow bellies or parasitic/repellant skunks. If my article offends you too bad you took it the wrong way.Advise don't let it get to you.

My article is meant to stimulate and force those who sees science and tech as a western civilization rather than a necessity.The Igbos have been buried countless times by critics for being too westernized yet the the Japanese with no natural resources is a force in world market. The North sees the only way of life as Islam and no other way yet they cure their headaches with Panadol and tyleno both product of science.And that is one reason they seem to be the most backward race in that goddamed country. Islam has a lot of good teachings but does not imply for you to be poor and less adventrous in other way of life. Science is neither christian or Islamic. Nigerian north will chose Islam over science and tech and that worries me with great pity.I will continue to criticize their leaders on their fixation with Islam until they discard that stereotype. I veiw them [Northern Leaders]as suspect in science/tech discovery.

If you stroll up, I believe I gave credit to Abalaka for breaking the Northern tradition of ineptness in science. Please don't get me wrong, may be his discovery, however false and quackery will motivate other educated North to measure up with the Biafran technological ambition.

The fact still remains clear that Nigeria military government had comsumately deprived Nigeria one of her most valuable resources that being the Biafran Scientist. If you want to, please take a trip to Umuahia [War Musuem]and see the wonders of Biafra. The lost is Nigeria today and the gain SouthAfrica.

In every civilized country after the civil war banks on recontruction. Nigeria chose to ignore the monstrousity of Biafran Scientist and saw them as war crimes. Right now as I speak, Nigeria is purchasing military hardwares from SouthAfrica and making a pack with them. What is the difference between South Africa ingenuity and Biafran no how? none. South African now exports military hardware.And indonasia is heading that way too. Nigeria could do the same. No, that goddamed country will rather rely on oil as their major export.

I don't know If this response will appease or ease your mind however, your feelings about my assessment is yours. I do not have no personal hatred against a particular person or group. I just merely have disappointment on certain leaders in Nigeria who are opposed to change. I have great respect to people power, empowerment of the Nigerian people.Competition is what Nigeria needs in all levels then here comes a great nation. Any human who is opposed to change and freedom is my enemy and as it stands now leaders from the North, East and West opposed to change are definitely my contentious and conptemptious enemies. Get it?

By the way, El Godage your definitely my pal and a Arewa brother for having the courage to be among Biafrans. I envy you on that.You are the kind of Nigerian north that we need to actualize our dreams.But I will not remain mute or deviate on how I feel about certain facts and signifance in Nigeria polity, particularly the Northern leaders whom I see with contempt and overzealous in Islamic way of life..

No offense intended just being me and factual. I am not the Biafran that remains mute when it comes to facts and significance.If you read between lines, my article is meant to stimulate and motivate those whose likelyhood depends solely on Islam. The northern leaders have this perception that Islam is their only way of life and science and tech is evil in the eyes of Islam. This perception makes it damn hard for other progrssive minded Northerners to quest for tech discovery. Science/ Tech is neither christianity or Islam. It is a necessity.While Islam does have have some satanic verses, there are other teachings of Islam but backwardness, poor or anti science/tech.

I am vey vocal and sometimes abusive but no harm intended to a particular person or groups. I find the northern leaders visibly contentious and conptemptious with Islamic belief and therefore makes it difficult for others in that geography to excel.

I will like to commend you though for having the boldness and guts to come to Biafra and dish out your opinions. That I envy and that is what Biafra is all about. The right not to infringe on one's inelienable right..freedom. I must ad that your my Arewa brother so long as you keep it bloodness.

I write not because I'm angry but disappointed by our so called leaders who do not like change. You may want to visit Umuahia, the War Meseum and see why Nigeria is stil in limbo about progress in that goddamed country. The Biaran Scientist till date are seen as war crimes rather than asserts. The Nigerian Military neglected one of their best resources [Biafran Scientist]for 40 years. Now tell me, is there any difference between SouthAfrican ingenuity and Biafran no how in science and tech discovery? none. SouthAfrican is exporting military hardwares as we speak to Nigeria yet you have bunch of Biafran tech junkies, some with no high school diploma ready to profit in the world market but lacks support from the S.O.Bis

I hope that Abalaka experiment, however false or quackery will motivate other Northern or Western Nigerians to have the same ambition in science/tech like the Biafrans, perhaps Nigeria will see the importance of tech in the gobal market.

I have debated with you extensively on all the issues you raised.
I will provide a link so that you can judge how you fared in those debates on methodolgy etc.
I share you view that nigeria's medical establishment acted stupidly in this matter. They could have acted more decisively to ensure that Abalaka complied with ethics. http://www.nigeriaworld.com/board-old/ubbhtml/Forum1/HTML/000452-2.html

OPINION
June 28, 2001

Tam David-West

The Academy did great harm to itself when in paragraph 3 (iii) it sort of gave the lie to the statement in its paragraph 3 (ii) that NAFDAC did not give its approval to the "Abalaka's vaccines." The question therefore is, who gave Abalaka the said "patent"? The Academy was silent also on this vital information. In its paragraph 1 (i) the Academy simply reported Abalaka's claim without any comment that his "vaccines" will protect HIV-negative persons for a "long time, probably a life time." How does he know this? No shred of evidence. He started human vaccination (professionally unethical) only in 1999 (paragraph 3(i) of the Academy report). Another very serious flaw in the Academy report is that even though Abalaka freely claims that his "vaccine" both "prevents" and "cures" HIV infection in humans, the Academy never asked the fundamental question: Does Vaccines cure? The answer is, of course No. Even a first year microbiology undergraduate knows this.

I should perhaps make the point that my comments on the Academy are not because of any animus against it. I was also not just nit-picking. The queries are professionally sound. And I would like to believe that the fellows would appreciate the spirit of these strictures. On sober reflection, they too would agree that there are some elements of perfunctoriness about the report.

Afterall, I was also once a Fellow of the Academy until I resigned on 2 April 1992 over the "election" of Jibril Aminu, as Fellow. My decision was based solely on Principles and Ethicality. I felt (and I still do) that his curriculum vitae was too sparse of research output or seriousness. Only ten research papers; and the last papers was published in 1979. He was, nevertheless, found "fit" to be a Fellow of the Academy in 1992. He was turned down only some one or two years before. No improvement in his CV in 1992. The voting "strategy" was highly controversial, and with some unmistakable odour of unethicality. I can't take it! There was also this indefensible injustice done by the Academy to another applicant, Professor C.O. Adesanya, who is also a cardiologist like Aminu; but who unlike Aminu was still actively researching. Thirty-Six papers (36); the last one was published in 1991. However, Adesanya was "manipulated" out; no admission to the fellowship of the Academy. Some Fellows were even given Board appointments in NNPC by Aminu. Stench! There is no question that the Academy is composed of very great scholars-the "election" of Aminu might have been a costly and compromising slip; an aberration. Hence, I do not agree with my eminent friend, Dr. Pius Okigbo, that the Academy is "ostensibly prestigious Academy of Science" (Sunday Times 15 March 1992, page 11). And this was before the Aminu's case or "election." After saying all these, I must stress that although the Fellows are among the finest scientists (with one query!) we have; it would be utterly presumptuous of the Academy to lay claim to a monopoly of scientific excellence. The truth is that there are many more fine scholars in the country who are not Fellows; and some may not even bother to apply. The case of Professor C.O. Adesanya is a good example. The point being made is that it would be wrong for government to see the Academy as the alpha and omega of scientific excellence; and so situate its HIV/AIDS programme in the Academy.

On the Abalaka's controversial "HIV/AIDS Vaccines" the Academy should clear the air on Abalaka's claim or disclosure that some Fellows of the Academy Secretly consult with him, while condemning him in the public (Nigerian Tribune July 7, 2000); page 2.

I will now highlight what I call or term Crucial Fundamentals, which Abalaka has apparently ignored. I will like to, however, before I do this present my professional credentials. This is never intended to be immodest or professional swank. My only reason, is to convince the reading public that I am not at sea on the subject. I am on a familiar turf: I have been teaching virology (and sometimes also Immunology) since 1967. I have been Professor of Virology for twenty-five years. Consultant Virologist to the University College Hospital, Ibadan. Member, WHO Expert Panel on Virus Diseases (Consultant status). Member WHO Expert Panel on International Nomenclature of Diseases. Director, WHO National Influenza Centre. My doctorate was on d"Vital Chemotherapy" (Anti-Viral Substances). It is germane to reiterate that my object is to raise issues (ALARM over the claims and methods used by Dr. Abalaka in his said breakthrough with HIV/AIDS therapy.

I am not a clinician, so I find myself inadequate to make comprehensive valued judgement on Abalaka's claims on his patients; or the testimonies of the "cured." However, I feel that I can safely make the point that mere weight gain or an unmonitored (long duration) sero-positive (HIV) to sero-negative (No HIV) are hardly adequate to establish the said efficacy of his "vaccine"; especially for a deadly disease like AIDS. There are carefully worked out International Standards for this. I had argued earlier that Science is international (never local).

Crucial Fundamentals: 1. When vaccines (or candidates vaccines) are prepared, the test for efficacy for very obvious reasons starts with Lower animals, working up to monkeys and finally human volunteers. You don't jump straight to human testing. It is most unethical professionally and morally to use human beings as experimental guinea pigs.

In civilised scientific cultures, one is forced to have a permit before one can use even lower animals for experiment. Dr. Abalaka claims that his "vaccines" are prepared from pooled blood from humans with full-blown AIDS.

These are processed (Method secret!) And later injected or inoculated into Healthy persons or AIDS patients. This is, as stated above, most unethical professionally and morally. As I said earlier this can only happen in Nigeria; No where else in the world. He never disclosed how he processed the pooled blood from AIDS patients before administering it to his patients or clients.

The only method of vaccine preparation readily open to him in his local Gwagwalada Medicrest Hospital, is HEAT treatment of the HIV/AIDS positive pooled blood. The scientific term is INACTIVATION. It destroys the Virus but not the antigens of virus.

I shall discuss this later for public awareness. If indeed it was Inactivation method he used, then he MUST have what we call INACTIVATION CURVES, or results to show that the preparation is 100 per cent Free of active HIV. This is Imperative; a Crucial Must. The reasons are commonsensical. It is Arrant NONSENSE to say that "This is Nigeria". The Nigerian human being is not different (in our context) from others of his species the world over. From the Academy Report, Abalaka is said to have sent a paper on his "FEAT" to the Lancet (a highly reputed scientific journal). We wait to see whether the paper will be accepted by Lancet WITHOUT the necessary information on how he prepared his said vaccine; and data on his clinical treatments (NOT trials, mind you). Abalaka seems to be confused in his use of "cure" or "prevent" with his "vaccines." Suffice it to say that vaccines Do NOT CURE. They PREVENT successful attack by microorganisms (viruses etc.). This is basic immunology. It is therefore an immunological heresy for Abalaka to be talking about "My curative vaccine against HIV." It is an established fact that the HIV (causative virus for AIDS) changes (in scientific parlance, we say Mutates) its "form"; and with this, its stimulation of Antibodies (or circulating "Fighters" in the blood) against infection also correspondingly change.

But, our Abalaka jauntily tells us that this known and well-documented changeability of HIV poses no worry or threat to his "vaccines." How come? Abalaka, obviously exuding great satisfaction with himself, flaunts or throws up a number of immunological concepts to explain (better, speculate) the claimed "success" of his "vaccines"; from Antibody-mediated immunity to Cell-mediated immunity. However, these are quite different. I shall discuss this later.

The HIV/AIDS Catastrophe: While the exact origin and time of the HIV (The virus that causes AIDS) remain unsettled, there is no question as to its unprecedented havoc to the human race. And talking about time, I came across a very recent paper on this during my last visit to the U.K. in May. The paper is titled, "Timing the Ancestor of the HIV-1 Pandemic Strain." It was published in the June 9, 2000 issue of the journal. In well researched investigations, the authors (nine in number from different specialities) placed the "Ancestor HIV" to 1931. I discussed this fascinating paper with my post-graduate students.

It is said that HIV/AIDS is easily the worst catastrophe or tragedy for Africa since the days of the odious Slave Trade. The statistics are frightening and staggering: Eleven million Casualities already in Africa alone. Two out of every three AIDS patients come from Sub-Sahara Africa (with concentration in East and Southern Africa - but no region is AIDS safe).

In a keynote address at a recent International Press Institute (IPI) meeting, the Vice-President of the United States, Al Gore, stated that some 40 million HIV/AIDS orphans will be in Africa by the year 2010. Their parents having been eliminated by the disease, AIDS.

And what is more frightening, treatment (therapy) is very expensive; even in the developed countries only few can afford it. The situation is of course much worse in Africa. For instance in Uganda, of the over one million HIV/AIDS patients, less than one thousand can afford the therapy. The recent International Conference on HIV/AIDS in South Africa, "AIDS 2000", which was nearly ruined by what I saw as silly "Medical Nationalism," disclosed to Africa and indeed the whole human race, the gravity or enormity of the AIDS scourge, not simply scare.

Human Strategies For "Combat" These follow known methodologies in viral chemotherapy. There are two major strategies: arresting or aborting the growth (multiplication or replication) of the virus itself, or enhancing or fortifying the body's defense systems (Immune Systems). Virus Strategies for counter -Combat: When virus invades a cell, it sort of stages a kind of "coup d'etat" against the cell (the body!). It establishes a vert intimate contact or "association" with the cell, to maximise, so to say, a most effective engagement. In the process, it forces the cell to use (better, divert) its physiological and metabolic resources towards the multiplication (replication) growth and development of millions of new virus particles. The cell also of course, tries to fight back, mobilising its "Defence headquarters" and its "army." Both the "minister of defence" and the "chief of army" are coordinated for the counter-attack. From the "arsenal" they role out the Cells Immune Systems, i.e Antibodies or Cellular Immune "offensives". If the virus gets the upper hand, the cell succumbs; and we have disease. On the other hand, if the cell gets the superior hand, the virus attack is aborted. No disease. I have chosen the Military and Coup metaphor, because we are so very familiar with them. To the extent that one can say rightly, that ours is a system of Military Governments by recurrent coups, with only a fleeting experience with Civilian Governments (Democratic?). I wish to refer to my Essay, "On Viruses As Coupists" (Newswatch November 3, 1997; page 34; This Day November 3, 1997; page 10. HIVAs"Super-Combatant/strategist": Different viruses have different target organs (or cells) that they attack. This is called organ, or tissue or cell Tropism. For example, poliovirus targets the intestine, alimentary canal or enteron; influenza virus, the respiratory tract; rabiesvirus, the central nervous system; yellow fever virus, the liver, spleen, bone marrow, lymph nodes.

In all the above selected examples (and much more) the body's defence system fights back' and succeeds most of the time. This is so because the body's immune system is left intact, under normal situations. With the Human Immunodeficient Virus (HIV) the story is quite different. The virus, as a "Super-Combatant or Strategist" targets and strikes at the very heart of the Body's Immune System, destroying the very crucial cells that are endowed to put-up effective counter-attack against it. If I may again use a military metaphor, HIV strikes and destroys the body's "ARMOURY"; leaving the army (or the military) effectively demobilised, prostrated or crippled, with no more ammunition to resort to.

Thus, in HIV infection, when the class of cells called T-helper cells is drastically depleted, the patient develops full-blown AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome).

These T-Cells are "Five-Star Generals"; "Super - Fighters". It will not be appropriate, in a popular journal or newspaper, to discuss the classes or "Units" of "fighters" in the "T-Cell Military Academy or Supreme Headquarters". Suffice it to say, that HIV as "Super-Strategist" targets them for elimination, in order to have an upper hand in the ferocious combat.

PUBLIC REACTION TO "ABALAKA VACCINES": Dr. Abalaka, is no doubt riding happily on the white horse of general public approval, especially among the UNINITIATES. This is largely because of the dread of HIV/AIDS. However, there is also little doubt that if the masses (or the citizenry) are well-informed, they might react differently. I hope my little effort here can contribute to this needed step.

I must, however, not hesitate to say that some of the reactions are silly and embarrassing to us as a nation in the global community of the Twenty-First Century.

Let me cite few examples: Dr. Paul Ojeih, "Lagos-based comparative medicine practitioner" (The Guardian On Sunday July 30, 2000; page 36) contributing to a special Report on Dr. Abalaka captioned "Banned or Lost, Abalaka's 'Cure' Lives" (By Ben Ukwuoma) argued that "Government has no right to ban" the Abalaka's "Vaccines" because we are, according to him now in a "democratic setting". He believed that "government should have initiated moves through the National Assembly" before the ban. Honestly, what has democracy got to do with what is clearly medical recklessness or audacity - using HUMAN BEINGS as guinea-pig for CURIOUS Products that go by the name "Vaccines".

This contribution by Ojeih, has further buttressed my contention that we should blame Government not Abalaka. The government never acted PROMPTLY or even sufficiently responsibly when the fantastic claims were being made and clients and patients thronged. Afterall, there are Laws on such things. The other day (Precisely last week) some patients of Abalaka trooped to the National Assembly to protest against the ban.

I was also reliably informed that the National Assembly might vote on it. I am amazed. They are not so competent. The issue at hand does NOT lend itself to a DEMOCRATIC VOTING of Pro-Abalaka versus Con- or Anti - Abalaka.