Talk:David J. Acer

February 2007

So I decided that this article needed writing... it's my first major addition of content to Wikipedia, and there is a LOT of information to put in. There are a whole bunch of theories about how Dr. Acer's patients got HIV when a bunch of other HIV+ doctors' patients didn't, like that he murdered them to bring mainstream attention to AIDS. These should probably all be written up (lots on PubMed, yay) but I'm not sure if they should be written up HERE or if a separate article should be created for the incident/controversy. It's not like Dr. Acer is known for anything else. Elfbabe 21:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Other alleged infected patients

Another of the infected patients was reported by the Chicago Tribune as Barbara Webb, a 66-year old grandmother (at the time) and an English teacher. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1992-06-11/news/9202220020_1_dr-david-acer-kimberly-bergalis-aids-virus

Two others were identified as Richard Driskill, a citrus plant foreman, age 33 at death in 1993, and Sherry Johnson, age 18 at the time she was identified by the CDC as infected as the "sixth victim" in 1993. http://articles.latimes.com/1993-06-27/news/mn-7702_1_aids-virus Starhistory22 (talk) 07:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

2021 revision

This case is currently receiving renewed public attention due to a new book, and it seems like a good time for a better-sourced, fact-based revision, which I'm beginning to work on. The Palm Beach Post article that was previously the article's sole source is a tabloid-style article that focuses extensively on Acer's personal life in lieu of the known scientific facts or political impacts of the case.

Identifying and adding new sources may mean ultimately revising the article content pretty substantially, as the current article's focus and structure relies heavily on the narrative of the Palm Beach Post article. --Certainstars (talk) 21:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Anyone interested in this case should read Fatal Extraction: The Story Behind the Florida Dentist Accused of Infecting His Patients with HIV and Poisoning Public Health (Jossey Bass Publishers, 1997). The author, Mark Rom, Ph.D., was the principal investigator of the GAO technical team whose subsequent report fully supported the CDC's conclusions. A congressman skeptical of the CDC's conclusion that Acer somehow gave HIV to Bergalis had ordered the GAO investigation, but that investigation only further confirmed what CDC had found. Neither CDC nor GAO could solve the mystery of just how Acer transmitted HIV to his patients, but both reports come to the definite conclusion that that is what happened.Ajrocke (talk) 12:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

The 1992 GAO report is still easily accessible at https://www.gao.gov/assets/pemd-92-31.pdf. It very clearly explains the methodology of the CDC's epidemiological and laboratory investigations of the first six possible transmission cases (patients A to F) and how it concluded that four of those (patients A, B, C and E) appeared to be linked to Acer, but two of them (D and F) did not. I think it would be a useful source for any revision to this article, because it not only explains the data but also elucidates the limitations of that data.

While I think most of the article is reasonably balanced, there are a couple of glaring faults. For example the statement "Investigators also discovered Kimberly Bergalis had lied to CDC investigators about her sexual history and other possible risk exposures" is not supported by the Barr article in the New York Times it cites. Barr is far more circumspect, and writes that she:

"may have had risk factors other than her visits to the dentist. In their summary of the case, C.D.C. investigators made it clear that they were skeptical of her claim that she had never had sexual intercourse. "There is reason to believe," the report noted, 'that the patient believes there would be serious negative impact if her mother believed she participated in any risky behaviors.'"

There is a big difference between pointing out that in general patients may not always be completely frank when discussing stigmatised or illegal activities, and making an outright and specific accusation of lying.

The final paragraph is also problematic. I'm glad it brought up the issue of "innocent" versus "deserving" AIDS cases in the popular consciousness of the time, because this provides important context to the controversies that ensued. However, the final sentence: "[t]he case of the 'Florida Dracula Dentist' has gone down in AIDS history alongside "Patient Zero" Gaetan Dugas as legends who have been unfairly demonized," appears to take the position - in a rather dramatic way - that Acer has since been exonerated. I think a more encyclopaedic approach would be to say that while there is evidence that several of Acer's patients appear to have been infected while receiving treatment from him, there were also credible voices that cast doubt on the certainty of that conclusion.On A Leash (talk) 03:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

One further issue with the second-last paragraph:"The CDC had closed and published its investigation in July 1990 without further verification or follow-up, but litigation against Acer's malpractice insurance continued through the 1990's." (my italics) As it stands, this statement suggests the CDC's investigations were closed prematurely, which is misleading at best.

While it's true that the CDC published its first report of a possible transmission in the July 27th 1990 MMWR it was highly tentative at that stage, and there were a number of follow-up reports as more potential cases among Acer's patients emerged over the following months and further investigations were performed to verify its earlier findings. Indeed, the GAO report notes that "CDC further refined its genetic investigation of the seven HIV-positive patients, and the results of these efforts were published in an article published in May 1992."

Rereading the GAO report I note that it considered eight possible transmissions, not six. There was also a patient G whose HIV infection was also considered by the CDC to be linked to Acer and a patient H whose infection was not, although the investigations into the case of H were still in the early stages at the time of the GAO report's preparation. I believe there may have been a total of 10 patients investigated all up - five or six of whom were linked to Acer and four or five who were proven to have acquired their HIV infection elsewhere. I haven't been able to find out much information about the last two cases yet. On A Leash (talk) 06:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Added citations

I added some more citations and cleaned up the language in the sections on his early life and career. The section on his AIDS diagnosis still needs improvement. Does anyone have any better sources? Kazrene (talk) 17:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)