To the Reader
THIS BOOK is painfully nonfiction -
the story is true, the characters, scientific and political, are
real. Secondary references have been checked and authenticated.
Since the importance of this information was clear, I labored to
write for both critical health scientists and intelligent lay
readers without losing either. Technical words are explained in
lay terms for all to better understand.
Though many people - black, white,
gay, straight, Jew and gentile - may wish to deny the
implications of this work, the truth is the truth. As British
statesman Edmund Burke said in the wake of the American
revolution, "People never give up their liberties but under some
delusion." Perhaps now, as AIDS consumes the lives, liberties,
and pursuits of an estimated 30 million HIV-positive people
worldwide, the time has come to vanquish our delusions about it
and its origin. Despite its social and scientific importance,
the origin of HIV has been clouded in mystery.
Based on the mass of circumstantial
and scientific evidence presented herein, the theory that
"emerging viruses" like HIV and Ebola spontaneously evolved and
naturally jumped species from monkey to man must be seriously
There is an old saying in medicine, that diagnosis is required
before treatment. The facts presented here, easily verified, may
help diagnose the man-made origin of the world's most feared and
deadly viruses. It is hoped this work will, therefore, help
redirect AIDS science in search of a cure, free AIDS victims
from the guilt and stigma attached to the disease, as well as
prevent such "emerging viruses" from reemerging.
I offer this investigation into the
origin of AIDS and Ebola for critical review in the hope that it
may also contribute to greater honesty in science, to political,
military, and intelligence community reforms that are truly
peace loving, and to self and social reflection as a
preventative against inhumanity.
LEONARD G. HOROWITZ
All at once, it seems, new viruses and virus-related diseases have
threatened the health of humans and many animal species. How did
this situation arise? Could it be that scientific studies and the
emergence of new pathogens are not totally unrelated events? In
writing this text, Dr. Horowitz has bravely questioned the extent to
which scientific research and lax government oversight may have
contributed to the present and coming plagues.
Open debate on this issue has been
soundly discouraged. Opponents to open dialogue on the apparent
relationship between early viral research and the latest germ
discoveries argue that little good, and considerable harm, would
come from a full disclosure of the facts.
Exposing the truth, many believed, would
tarnish the reputations of
make it more difficult to
maintain science funding
likely leave many issues
Others argued that it was simply too
late to undo past mistakes. The fact that a better understanding of
the new viruses' origins could lead to new treatment approaches,
and, more importantly, to ways of preventing future outbreaks, was
In considering the recent genesis of HIV
and the Ebola viruses, Dr. Horowitz's book has explored three areas
of great general and scientific interest:
the history of intensive
research into the viral causes of cancer wherein readers can
become familiar with the many, now questionable, virus
the CIA and Department of
Defense efforts to develop and defend against biological
weapons of germ warfare. Here Dr. Horowitz should be
especially congratulated for presenting well-researched
little known facts that, though highly disturbing, are an
important piece of history that may also bear heavily on the
emergence of new viruses
Clearly, as anyone who reads this book
will conclude, there is a great need for more open dialogue
concerning the past and present risks inherent in the production of
live viral vaccines. It is this topic that I am pleased to address
here. In 1798, Edward Jenner, an English physician advanced the use
of cowpox (vaccinia) virus for immunizing humans against smallpox.
He recognized that pathogens can behave differently while infecting
different species. Indeed, he theorized that the vaccinia infection,
which caused mild problems for cows, caused more severe ailments in
Only after adapting to cows, did
vaccinia acquire limited infectivity for humans. The open sores that
humans developed were far less severe than those induced by smallpox
(variola) virus and essentially remained localized to the site of
inoculation. Moreover, contact with vaccinia virus caused
individuals to become virtually immune to the widespread disease
caused by the small-pox virus. The success of vaccination is
reflected in today's total elimination of smallpox as a disease.
Jenner's vaccination approach was
followed in the twentieth century by Pasteur's use of rabies virus
grown in rabbit's brain, and by Theiler's finding that he could
reduce the effect of yellow fever virus by growing it in chicken
embryos. These successes set the precedent for other scientists to
attempt to reduce the pathogenicity of other human and animal
viruses by inoculating them into foreign species. Although we now
look back with some disdain at the crudeness of early immunization
experiments - such as the 1938 injections of polio virus, grown in
mouse brains, into humans, most people, including scientists, are
unaware that we still use primary monkey kidney cells to produce
live polio virus vaccine.
Likewise, dog and duck kidney cells were
used to make licensed rubella vaccines. Experimental vaccines, grown
in animal tissues and intended for human use, were commonly tested
in African monkeys, and it is likely that many of these monkeys were
released back into the wild. This practice may have led to the
emergence of primate diseases, some of which could have been
transmitted back to humans. Large numbers of rural Africans were
also chosen as test recipients of experimental human vaccines. In
veterinary medicine, live viral vaccines have been widely used in
domestic pets and in animals destined to become part of the
food-chain. Undoubtedly, many cross-species transfer of viruses have
occurred in the process.
Even today, more than ten foreign
species are used to produce currently licensed vaccines for cats and
dogs. The general acceptance of the safety of cross-species produced
vaccines was supported in part by the generalization that there are
inherent restrictions to the interspecies spread of disease. Thus,
like vaccinia, most viruses are less harmful, but others can be far
more dangerous after invading a foreign host. One dramatic example
is that of the human infection caused by the herpes-type monkey B
virus. This germ remains a rather harmless invader of monkeys, but
place it in humans, and striking, severe, acute illness results
which commonly ends in death. Likewise, a modified
horse-measles-virus (morbillivirus) can be lethal to man.
Other examples include the relatively
mild dog distemper morbillivirus that was blamed for the death of
some 3,000 lions in the Serengeti; the cat-adapted parvovirus that
caused worldwide infection in dogs; and the mouse-derived
lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus that caused severe hepatitis in
monkeys. It is the slow onset of disease that can be particularly
baffling, especially when considering potential viral diseases
transmitted through vaccines. Most acute diseases are relatively
easy to recognize and amenable to further prevention.
The delayed onset of chronic
debilitating diseases that could be associated with animal viruses
finding their way into a new species, e.g., man, are much more
challenging. Here, the association between the germ and the symptoms
it causes is obscured. Such an association would be especially hard
to establish if the clinical features presented during the illness
are poorly defined and mimic those of other known ailments. One
example is the 1996 concern over the food-borne transmission of the
prion disease scrapie. Initially carried by infected sheep, this
protein caused bovine spongiform encepalopathy in "mad" cows. Then
it was apparently passed on to humans resulting in juvenile
While in some cases disease transmission
has been traced to certain vaccine lots, other times, even widely
distributed licensed vaccines have been found to be contaminated.
Yellow fever vaccine was known to contain avian leukosis virus.(*
Editor's note: This is the retrovirus that causes leukemia in
chickens.) During World War II, batches of yellow fever vaccines
were inadvertently also contaminated with hepatitis B virus. Current
measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccines contain low levels of reverse
transcriptase, an enzyme associated with retroviruses.
Both Salk and Sabin polio vaccines made
from rhesus monkeys contained live monkey viruses called SV40, short
for the fortieth monkey virus discovered. As Dr. Horowitz documents,
polio vaccines may also have contained numerous other monkey
viruses, some of which may have provided some building blocks for
the emergence of HIV-l and human AIDS. The finding of SV40 in rhesus
monkey kidney cells, during the early 1960s, led to a rapid switch
to Mrican green monkeys for polio vaccine production. Kidney cells
from African green monkeys, still being used to produce live polio
vaccines today, may have been infected with monkey viruses that were
not easily detectable.
The monkeys used before 1980, for
example, were likely to have been infected with simian
immunodeficiency virus (SIV)-a virus genetically related to HIV-l.
The origin of this virus and whether it contaminated any
experimental vaccines are issues that need addressing. What makes
vaccines so troublesome is that their production and administration
allows viral contamination to breach the two natural barriers that
often restrict cross-species infections: First is the skin. Direct
inoculation of vaccines breaches this natural barrier and has been
shown to produce increased infections in animals and humans.
Such was the case when SV 40 was
injected intramuscularly in contaminated Salk polio vaccine. Later
it was learned that Sabin's orally administered polio vaccines were
safer since the live simian viruses were digested in the stomach and
thereby inactivated. Additionally risky, when it comes to breaking
the skin barrier, is the chance of transmitting viruses from one
person to another through the use of unsterilized needles. Second is
the unique and natural viral surface characteristics that reduce the
chance that viruses might jump species.
The mixing of vaccine viruses with
others found in the cells and tissues used to develop the vaccine
can potentially lead to the development of new recombinant mutants
that are more adaptive and have wider host range than either of the
original viruses. This can especially happen when a live viral
vaccine produced in cells from one species is then given to another
species. Also of concern is the transmission of new genetic
information along with the vaccine virus. For instance, early
adenoviral vaccines, produced in rhesus monkeys' kidney cells,
developed to protect people against respiratory infections,
incorporated parts of the SV40 virus that remained as a vaccine
contaminant even after production of the vaccine virus was switched
to human cells.
Numerous other vaccines, especially
those that were used in early field trials in Africa, should be
analyzed for those genetic components which characterize today's
monkey and human pathogens. Unfortunately, this new awareness of
potential problems with live viral vaccines has had little impact on
the viral vaccine approval process. Seemingly, U.S. government
agencies, principally the FDA, have been reluctant to impose
additional testing requirements on vaccines once they are approved
for use. In effect, government officials are given a single
opportunity to decide on a new vaccine's safety.
Even then, government regulators
themselves may be denied certain critical information belonging to
the vaccine industry. Specifically, FDA regulations are written so
as not to compel industry to reveal testing information not directly
pertaining to the lots submitted for clinical use. The FDA is
reluctant to admit its lack of knowledge about vaccines to the
Yet, practicing physicians are expected
to unquestionably endorse the safety of vaccines under all
circumstances and to all individuals. Aside from these bureaucratic
barriers to viral vaccine safety assurance, there are additional
major concerns. Since vaccine development information is considered
proprietary - protected by nondisclosure policies - government
officials and researchers must shield potential safety issues from
public scrutiny. This censorship is rationalized by the all too
persuasive argument that vaccines cannot be criticized lest the
public become noncompliant in taking them.
Finally, this silence is buttressed by
the small number of people capable of critically evaluating vaccine
manufacturing and safety testing procedures. In essence, health care
professionals and the general public know little about the possible
dangers of live viral vaccines. As an illustration, the issue of
possible simian cytomegalovirus (SCMV) contamination of live polio
virus vaccines has been suppressed since 1972.
On the eve of Nixon's war on cancer, a
joint Lederle Corporation/FDA Bureau of Biologics study showed that
eleven test monkeys, imported for polio vaccine production, tested
positively for SCMV. The reluctance of the FDA to act on this matter
was revealed in a corporate memo delivered the following year. Even
in 1995, following a report to FDA officials concerning a patient
infected with a SCMV-derived virus, no new in-house testing of polio
vaccines for SCMV has occurred. Moreover, this author's specific
requests for vaccine material to undertake specific testing, were
denied on the basis of protecting "proprietary" interests.
This basic flaw in the regulatory
process must be addressed - the FDA must be responsive to the
medical-scientific community's need for accurate information
regarding the potential hazards of products released for use in
society. In the event that public health and safety concerns arise,
industry should wave its right to maintain proprietary intelligence.
This would enable the FDA to disclose more information concerning
the safety of FDA regulated products to the medical-scientific
community. Such a proposal should be included in the all pending and
future FDA reforms.
It is against this background of
possible risks of past viral vaccine studies, uncertain biological
recombinants, bureaucratic censorship, a rising tide of medical
consumerism in the information age, and an urgent need for
legislative FDA reform, that Dr. Horowitz's work contributes. At
minimum, what you are about to read exposes many important facts
which, unfortunately, few people realize and all would be better off
At best, this important text raises far
greater hope that by knowing their origin, cures for the many
complex emerging viruses, including AIDS, may be forthcoming.
W. JOHN MARTIN, M.D., Ph.D.*
Dr. W. John Martin, a Professor of Pathology at the University of
Southern California, is also the Director of the Center for Complex
Infectious Diseases in Rosemead, California. Between 1976 and 1980,
Dr. Martin served as the director of the Viral Oncology Branch of
the FDA's Bureau of Biologics (now the Center for Biologics,
Evaluation and Research), the government's principal agency in
charge of human vaccines.
"DAVID was an alcoholic, an active alcoholic," recalled Edward
Parsons. "I say that - I have nothing to hide. I'm also a recovering
alcoholic. When I met David, I spoke to him about sobriety and the
possibility of becoming involved with AA, and I don't think that was
at the time really an option for him." 
Robert Montgomery, the attorney for four
of the six Florida dental AIDS victims, listened intently as the
auburn-haired nurse and once closest homosexual friend of the
infamous Dr. David Acer spoke under oath for the record.
"He would drink - start to drink and
not be able to stop and become inebriated, sloppy, more
aggressive, more assertive. He would come on to people a lot
"And you believe he may have
intentionally infected his [dental] patients?"
"Yes. What happened was David was
angry. He was very angry. I guess he had a right to be. Kimberly
Bergalis was very angry, so was the family. That's a natural
reaction to a diagnosis like that [AIDS]. But I had a
conversation with David that bothered me. It has bothered me for
quite a while. Now, when ultimately these five patients came
forward I was certainly surprised at that disclosure, and then
heard that they were testing positive for the same strain of
virus that David had apparently possessed. This is all based on
media. This was not based on any conversation I had with him.
But I was able to recall a conversation I had with him that
Parsons paused to take a drink.
"Go on," prodded the counselor. "He
had been drinking," Parsons continued.
"He - we discussed AIDS again. I
think I mentioned a friend of mine had been diagnosed and he
discussed with me - he verbalized some opinions and some
feelings, and he said something to the effect that, well, our
society does not want to address the issue because they perceive
it to be a homosexual problem, and when it begins to affect
younger people and grandparents, I think is the words he used,
he said that maybe society will do something. I kind of just
blew it away. I didn't think much of it.
"I asked him how his practice was
going. He said fine, and that was the end of that conversation.
I met with him again up at his home. . . , and we discussed it
again. There was sort of an anger there about HIV and what our
government was. We got into many, many political discussions
where HIV came from, the World Health Organization theory and
all of these various conversations about it... The
perception within the gay community was that our government
avoided the issue; neglected the issue. We discussed everything
from the controversy surrounding Robert Gallo and the French
researcher Luc Montagnier at the Pasteur Institute; Ronald
Reagan. Just numerous conversations pertaining to AIDS."
"And this began in 1985?" Montgomery
"1985, that's correct."
"What did he say about Montagnier
"David believed that HIV was
probably, if not created in a lab, he believed that HIV was
introduced into the human population and various governments
knowingly sat on this information for a period of years before
they actually acknowledged [it]..."
Montgomery looked puzzled. "Are you
saying that you interpreted that... to mean that you felt Dr.
Acer was potentially deliberately infecting his patients?"
"I think so," Parsons replied. "We
had - as I said, we had numerous conversations about AIDS and
politics and transmission... He believed that there were
solutions out there; that there were drugs and chemicals out
there that could kill the virus and that there was a conspiracy...
Some sort of a conspiracy...
"What he said was when HIV begins to
affect mainstream - I think the word he used was mainstream
America, when we start seeing people who are - I think the word
he used was adolescents and grandparents, then maybe something
will be done..." 
The preceding legal testimony provided
by Edward Parsons was passed on to authorities from the United
States Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS).
Investigators for these agencies then also interviewed Parsons.
According to the U.S. General Accounting Office, HRS officials then
delivered the incriminating testimony to the Florida attorney
general's office. Both offices then failed to pursue a criminal
investigation into the case "noting the absence of supporting
Officially thwarted in his effort to
relay his circumstantial evidence to the world, on October 1, 1993,
Parsons's broadcast his claims with the help of Barbara Walters on
ABC television's "20/20."  The authorities thereafter announced
that Parsons's testimony was unreliable. Dr. Robert Runnells, an
expert witness hired by attorney Montgomery to argue Acer's
negligence in infection control in the now famous Kimberly Bergalis
case, openly discredited Edward Parsons in his book 'AIDS in the
Dental Office.' 
Runnells wrote that Acer's close friend:
"consciously or subconsciously, may
have begun championing the theory of Acer murdering his patients
to keep the case before the public - to continue to emphasize to
mainstream America that anyone can get AIDS - whether or not
they are gay. In fact, it was [Parsons] who wanted desperately
to carry the anti-homophobia message. Because Acer and Kimberly
were constantly in the headlines, [Parsons] may have decided
that the media would continue to carry a story that Acer may
have intentionally injected his patients." 
Contrary to Dr. Runnells's and attorney
Montgomery's claims, the mass of circumstantial and scientific
evidence presented in my earlier book 'Deadly Innocence: Solving the
Greatest Murder Mystery in the History of American Medicine' 
showed the most plausible way Dr. David Acer could have infected six
patients with the AIDS virus between December, 1987 and July, 1989
was by intent, just as Edward Parsons alleged.
'Deadly Innocence,' along with three
investigation reports I subsequently published in the
scientific/health professional journals 'AIDS Patient Care,' 
'Clinical Pediatric Dentistry,'  and the 'British Dental
Journal,'  provided evidence that Dr. Acer was developmentally
and behaviorally predisposed to become an organized serial killer.
By reviewing Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) methods and materials, I learned that all serial
killers kill for the sake of power, control, and revenge. The most
important question in the Deadly Innocence investigation then
became, "Against whom did Acer hold a vendetta?" In light of Parsons's legal testimony and other evidence, it became evident that
the dentist's primary vendetta was against the United States Public
Health Service (USPHS) and the CDC whom he believed developed and
intentionally deployed the AIDS virus.
Indeed, he held the authorities
accountable for his infection and the deaths of scores of others.
During a personal conversation with Parsons, he admitted to me that
Acer was outraged by the notion that the American homosexual
community had been specifically targeted to receive HIV-tainted
hepatitis B vaccinations during the 1970s.
Though this theory, I later learned, was
embraced by at least a half dozen health scientists and scholars
throughout the world, in the United States, the "World Health
Organization theory," as it is called, was principally advanced by
Dr. Robert Strecker, a practicing internist and gastroenterologist
with an additional doctorate in pharmacology.
As a trained pathologist and insurance
industry consultant, Dr. Strecker initially investigated the AIDS
epidemic and virus under contract with a large insurance company.
Following years of research, Strecker published a highly
controversial videotape entitled 'The Strecker Memorandum.' 
According to Edward Parsons, "David and I viewed The Strecker
Memorandum at length and spent hours in heated discussion over its
disturbing contents." 
In The Memorandum, Strecker alleged that
the AIDS virus was "requested," "created," and "deployed" and its
effects were predicted long before the epidemic began. In short,
Acer believed that he was one of millions of innocent victims of
genocide. The speculation that Dr. Acer was angry with "mainstream"
America for not recognizing AIDS as everyone's problem was only part
of the story that the authorities and media promoted. The fact is
many people are similarly angry, yet they do not go around killing
The explanation fell short of a
plausible murder motive. Acknowledging the possibility that Acer, a
closet homosexual who never came to terms with being gay, may have
held a vendetta against mainstream homophobes, I realized Acer's
second plausible motive. As an intelligent, scientifically trained,
solo practitioner, the terminally ill dentist would have realized he
could never spread his virus throughout the entire U.S. population.
What he could do, however, and what the evidence showed he
intentionally accomplished, was to spread the fear of AIDS in health
care throughout mainstream America.
In fact, the open letter Dr. Acer
published, shortly before his death, spelled out his two principal
vendettas against American public health authorities and mainstream
homophobic society. Within eight brief paragraphs, published in
Florida newspapers on September 6 and 7, 1990, Acer condemned the
CDC six times for their alleged involvement in the viral
transmissions and articulated his grave distrust of them.
He ended by subtly expressing his
fascination with the probability of initiating mass hysteria
throughout the United States:
"It is important to be informed of
this disease, so you are aware of the dangers and how it can and
cannot be transmitted. As fear of the unknown is hard to deal
with, but knowledge of what you fear can at least help you know
what action to take, if any..." 
Following months of intensive
investigation, HRS and CDC researchers failed to report Parsons's
testimony, or give serious consideration to the murder theory.
Rather, they speculated that this first and only documented cluster
of doctor-to-patient HIV transmission cases was most likely "an
accident." They published that injuries sustained by a fatigued and
shaky Dr. Acer, who performed "invasive" procedures on his patients,
were the most likely cause of the infections and not negligence
(that is, the use of un-sterilized instruments and equipment).
In addition, after having the Florida
Attorney General's Office review the facts, they rejected the
"murder theory." Later, following years of denial, the Barbara
Walters interview of Edward Parsons, and the identification of
Acer's sixth victim, Sherry Johnson, who received no invasive
procedures aside from local anesthetic injections, the CDC exhumed
the murder theory for plausible consideration. Dr. Harold Jaffe,
Deputy Director for HIV/AIDS Science at the CDC, quickly concluded
the case would likely remain "an unsolvable mystery." 
Adding to the confusion, in early June
1994, a CBS "60MINUTES" report proposed that the victims themselves
were to blame. The program accused Kimberly Bergalis, the elderly
Barbara Webb, and the others of concealing sexual practices and
other lifestyle risks, and said their infections came from random
community exposures. Though this disinformation was quickly and
easily debunked by official as well as independent investigators,
for a grossly uninformed public, the cruel CBS hoax had left its
The Florida dental AIDS tragedy
generated intense controversy, mass hysteria, needless concerns,
political legislation, billions in financial costs, and even
increased death and disease among those frightened away from health
care. In light of the importance of the case, its toll on society,
and the many questions it raised, I believed, prior to writing this
book, that a final chapter in the case needed to be written. In a
strange and unsettling way, this book at least shows that Acer's
anger, though obviously not his actions, was justified. The mystery
of his case, for many now, may be solved.
More-over, Acer may have fulfilled a
remarkable destiny - creating one mystery to help solve a larger one
- the origin of AIDS, Ebola and other "emerging viruses."
ABC-Atomic Energy Commission
Institute for Public Policy
AIBS-American Institute of
AIFLD-American Institute for
Free Labor Development
AMI-Allan Memorial Institute
AMV -avian myeloblastosis
ARC-AIDS related complex
ARV -AIDS associated
ASCC-American Society for
the Control of Cancer
BSL-biological safety level
(1-4) BW-biological weapons
BPL-Boston Pubic Library
BPP-Black Panther Party
BLV-bovine leukemia virus
BVV-bovine visna virus
CBW-chemical and biological
CDC-Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention
CFR-Council on Foreign
CNSS-Center for National
(Counter) Intelligence Program
CPUSA-Communist Party U.S.A.
CSH-Cold Spring Harbor
DCI-Director of Central
DREW-Department of Health,
Education and Welfare
DOD-Department of Defense
EBV-Epstein Barr Virus
FBI-Federal Bureau of
FELV-feline (cat) leukemia
FDA-Food and Drug
FNLA-National Front for the
Liberation of Angola
FOIA-Freedom of Information
FSA-Federal Security Agency
GAO-U.S. General Accounting
GRID-Gay related immune
HAV-human AIDS-related virus
HBsAg-hepatitis B surface
HBV-hepatitis B virus
HELA-Henrietta Lack (cell
HRS-Florida Department of
Health and Rehabilitative Services
HSPH-Harvard School of
for Research on Cancer
LBI-Litton Bionetics, Inc.
MKNAOMI-CIA code for secret
biological weapons program
MKULTRA-CIA code for secret
mind control program
MPLA-Popular Movement for
the Liberation of Angola
MSD-Merck, Sharp & Dohme
NAACP-National Assoc. for
the Advancement of Colored People
NAS-National Academy of
and Space Administration
NATO-North Atlantic Treaty
NBC-New Bolton Center
NFF-Nicaraguan Freedom Fund
NIAID-National Institute for
Allergies and Infectious Diseases
NIH-National Institutes of
NYCBB-New York City Blood
NYCBC-New York City Blood
NYUMC-New York University
OPC-Office of Policy
OSRD-Office of Scientific
Research and Development
OSS-Office of Strategic
OTRAG-Orbital Transport and
PAHO-Pan American Health
PUSH-People to Save Humanity
RAPID-Resources for the
Awareness of Population and International Development
SCF-Save the Children Fund
SFV-simian foamy virus .
Order of Malta
Division of the Army
SVCP-Special Virus Cancer
SVLP-Special Virus Leukemia
SV(40)-simian virus (40)
UNFAO-U.N. Food and
UNFPA-U.N. Fund for
UNICEF-U.N. Children's Fund
UNIT A-National Union for
the Complete Independence of Angola
USAID-U .S. Agency for
USIA-U.S. Information Agency
USPHS-U .S. Public Health
USDHEW-U.S. Dept. of Health,
Education and Welfare
VFHP-Voluntary Fund for
WRS-War Research Service
WBC-white blood cells
WPPA-World Population Plan
 Runnells RR. AIDS in the Dental
Office. The Story of Kimberly Bergalis and David Acer. Fruit
Heights, Utah: IC Publications, Inc., 1993, pp. 293-298; Johnson
vs. Acer (Legal suit brought against dentist David Acer by
Deposition of Edward Parsons for Robert Montgomery, December 9,
1993. Visual Evidence, Inc., (407-655-2855).
 United States General Accounting Office. AillS-CDC's
investigation of HIV transmission by a dentist. GAO/PEMD-9231 ,
Washington, D.C. September 29,1992.
 American Broadcasting Company. 20120. Interview with Edward
Parson on the Florida dental AillS tragedy. October 1,1993.
 Horowitz LG. Deadly Innocence: Solving the greatest murder
mystery in the history of American medicine. Rockport, MA:
Tetrahedron, Inc., 1994.
 McLoed D. Did Dr. Acer intentionally kill patients? Academy
of General Dentistry Impact. 1995;23,10:19.
 Horowitz LG. Correlates and predictors of sexual homicide
with HIV in the Florida dental AIDS tragedy. AIDS Patient Care.
 Horowitz LG. Sexual homicide with HIV in a Florida dental
office? Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry.
 Horowitz LG. Murder and cover-up may explain the Florida
dental AIDS mystery. British Dental Journal. 1995;10;24:423
 Strecker R. The Strecker Memorandum. The Strecker Group,
1501 Colorado Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90041, 1988.
 Edward Parsons personal communication.
 Breo DL. The dental AIDS cases-Murder or an unsolvable
mystery? JAMA 270:2732-2734, 1993.
 CBS News-a 6O-MINUTES report. Kimberly's story. Produced by
Josh Howard. June 19, 1994.