This story, of senior respected scientists departing from the scientific consensus and holding fast, it's got amazing qualities. It seems to keep happening and the legs of the story seem to be the same: Conviction, partial evidence reading, anger, consequences out of the expected (like science policy consequences in social governance)
Of course, there's the other side of the coin: When the outsider, who maintains that yes, continents do drift, and no, it's not just fantasy to say so, winds up getting the scientific consensus to move over their side of the table.
I don't think Duesberg got there. I'd be interested if there are reasons to say that things like the antivirals (which are demonstrated to work) or PREP can be interpreted as aligning to his view, without breaking your back bending over to do it, or if he's just .. in the rough.
