adrianjordan89 I don't really give movies 1 star unless for extreme circumstances. When it comes to documentaries, honesty is the most important aspect. When a documentary skirts its responsibilities it becomes propaganda at least and utterly dangerous at the worst. House of Numbers is both. It is filled with numerous inaccuracies, holds an infantile view of science, and is deceitfully edited to make these experts appear to say things that they are not. Many of the experts in the film have released statements condemning the film for these tactics. This should be shocking and rage-inducing to anyone that has seen this movie or is considering it. Not only is the movie dishonest in its editing, it has now developed another facet of dishonesty: filing false DMCA claims against those who wish to critique it. The creators of the film, Knowledge Matters, has become incredibly dedicated to ensure criticism of the film is not to be heard although seem perfectly fine with having the ENTIRE film uploaded by dozens of different users. However, when someone wishes to cite the film or use footage of it under the Fair Use Doctrine it is quickly taken down. I find this quite interesting considering that throughout the entirety of the film there is the accusation that their movement is being censored.This film deserves no respect as art or as academia for its bastardization of what medical science has taught us over the last 35 years. Questions concerning HIV/AIDS should always be answered and investigated, but this religious drivel is being used to sell a preconceived idea - and a dangerous one at that.Tread carefully with films such as these and always fact check things for yourself.

a_baron This documentary can be summed up in one word: controversial. Although some justifiable criticisms have been made of it, if the people who made it and those who appear in it - particularly Peter Duesberg - are not being entirely honest, they are far from the only ones.In fact, I interviewed Duesberg last year, and I have to say I found him 100% sincere. That doesn't mean he is right, but the principal contentions of this film have yet to be refuted. Let us for the moment ignore the existence or non-existence of HIV, what can we say for certain?Not everybody is equally at risk. AIDS is not an epidemic, at least not in the West. There are no universal criteria; if you have influenza in London, you have influenza everywhere else. The same cannot be said for AIDS or HIV.The pathology of AIDS is strikingly different in different parts of the world. And, for all the countless billions spent on research, we are no nearer to finding a cure now than we were back in the 1980s.Having said that, AIDS has been and continues to be big business, including for the condom industry; incidentally, condoms do more to spread sexual diseases than to protect against them due to something called risk compensation behaviour, which is never mentioned by either the condom or the AIDS industries.Another big name who appears herein is Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis. It is, or should be clear, whatever else they are, that so-called AIDS denialists are not to be classed with Creationists must less Flat Earthers, though you wouldn't think so if you listened to the AIDS establishment.

Matthew Spears No documentary is truly unbiased. This documentary seems to either get reviews of 10 or very low depending on how the reviewer's position is on the HIV/AIDS. I will give it high marks because:It is on a very relevant, topical subject with much fear around it that has not had much deep questioning on it by the media. The filmmaker interviews very knowledgeable scientists who were part of the history. When it came to the science, I didn't see any quack interviewed. There were very decorated scientists on both "sides".Even if you have a firm view that's not what the filmmaker concludes, it is a very well done film that makes you think. That's what a good documentary is all about.

Brian Carter This outstanding documentary film puts into perspective why untold billions of dollars are spent on a wishy-washy, broadly defined syndrome with admittedly no cures insight, pills that have not saved one person and failure after utter failure to find a vaccine in almost 30 years."I think HIV has totally not turned out to be the cause of AIDS, HIV has turned out not to be." said Neville Hodgkinson, the British journalist in the film. His statement seems the most fitting expression one comes away with.Luckily, after all these years, we have the filmmaker to thank for getting the orthodox mainstay to lay out their words tantamount to the Holy Bible for all those to witness. Remarkable and revealing.However, in today's world, The HIV/AIDS bandwagon keeps marching along. Sad but true, but is there light at the end of the tunnel? I think so.