The Stars Are Right: The Irish Rose: Parkhurst Interview

Back to Frank Lovejoy's page.

[bracketed text represent answers Parkhurst requested be edited or suppressed for publication]

Lovejoy: When and where was the virus first recorded?

Parkhurst: It’s hard to say exactly. I suspect that the virus has been present since very early times, perhaps waxing and waning as it moved amongst the population. There are many descriptions in ancient history and in old folklore of certain types of “people” that seem to correspond to someone who would be carrying the virus. Since the Condition has historically affected only a small percentage of the population – unlike say cholera or influenza – and can only be contracted under a set of very specific circumstances - it hasn’t been well documented. Or well known to traditional medicine. I would not be surprised to discover that like many other illnesses that have plagued mankind that it has been a part of the human condition since man was living in caves.

Lovejoy: Your institution was the first to study the disease in depth, and I understand that you were the first person to fully describe its effects and give it a name. How did you get involved in this project?

Parkhurst: Well . . . that’s a bit of a long story. You’ll understand if I need to be discreet about some of the specific details in order to protect the privacy of my patients. In early 1929, I was working at [Buffalo General Hospital, in Buffalo New York] I was a specialist there in emergency room procedures – so I saw a lot of extremely critical patients who arrived at the hospital in near death situations. In any given day there would be a wide range of injuries – auto accidents, gun or knife wounds, industrial accidents . . . (

[Parkhurst goes off on a tangent describing all sorts of gory details – until Frank pulls him back on track.]

. . . Oh, yes . . . sorry . . . where was I? Ah – early 1929 . . . [Mrs. Weiss was brought into the emergency room, having suffered an attack in her home by the enemies of her husband and the people he was working with.] She was in critical condition, having lost a great deal of blood, it was during my treatment of her wounds, that I became aware that she carried a virus – the type of which I’d never encountered before. Of course my first priority was to stabilize her, and ensure that her injuries were no longer life threatening. But as a doctor, I could not help but be both concerned and intrigued by the existence of this mystery virus. Concerned, because at that time I knew nothing about it’s properties, or how contagious it was. Intrigued, because this was something – that as far as I knew – was completely unknown to medicine.

Lovejoy: The Foundation was successful at developing a potential treatment for the disease; why did you stop working?

Parkhurst: The research looked to be fairly promising at first. The preliminary testing that I did with animals indicated that while it wasn’t a cure by any means, it did allow a sort of stabilization. So that the effects of the virus on the system were suppressed. However, after a time, there were side effects that became evident – side effects that – depending on the individual - might offset the benefit the treatment provided.

Lovejoy: You no longer conduct research of any kind, is that correct? Why did you stop?

Parkhurst: Like many of the great men of research medicine – I contracted the virus myself during the course of my work. I came to quickly realize that my very competent team at the Foundation could probably carry on the medical work I was doing. But that I, myself would be more useful in working directly with the people who already had this Condition. They have had few advocates – and virtually no one of medical training who understood personally what contracting the Condition entailed.

Lovejoy: The formula you developed while at the Foundation has been the cause of several deaths as different groups try to get a hold of it. What makes the formula so important?

Parkhurst: Well – understand that the number of people from the total world’s population who have this Condition is relatively small. Even so – despite the side effects – the treatment offers the only known hope of relief from the physical effects of the virus. If you were diagnosed – say with some form of cancer – and someone offered you a means of preventing the spread of that cancer – you would likely pay any amount to obtain it. And given that the drug must be taken at regular intervals in order to keep the virus in check – you would have a ready-made market over which to exercise complete control. Now, I’m not saying that this is what is happening here . . . but people have certainly been killed for less.

Lovejoy: Can the treatment be weaponized?

Parkhurst: Do you mean, could it be turned to harm someone as well as help them? Any type of medicine can become a poison if given in large enough quantity – even to someone who isn’t ill. So, yes in that instance I would say that it could be used as a weapon against individuals. However, there is no danger to the public at large, it could not – for instance – be released over an area the way mustard gas was during the Great War.

Lovejoy: Why did you give your notes to Heather Flynn instead of simply destroying them?

Parkhurst: It’s very difficult to simply destroy something that you have invested so much time and dedication to. Miss Flynn was someone I trusted, and she understood the value of the information to those who have the Condition. Especially since she had been exposed to it in the past herself. My thought at the time was that at some point myself – or another researcher might use the information to find a way to move forward. To mitigate or eliminate the side effects, or discover new lines of research based on the original work – without having to start from scratch.

Lovejoy: Boyar Rulianoff suggested that the treatment removed the positive effects associated with the disease. What effects are those?

Parkhurst: The virus’ effect is a mixed bag. There are many detrimental effects it has on the body both long term and short term. Clearly no one would want to contract this condition and live under it’s effects. However, it also brings with it a certain type of acuity and hypersensitivity to everyday stimulus. For some persons, this might be considered a positive or desirable effect. After a time, the individual with the virus adjusts to these changes, and they become the norm for them. Because the treatment inhibits the effects of the virus, it also inhibits or eliminates this hypersensitivity.

Lovejoy: One of the effects of the virus is a loss of fertility. Does your treatment restore that?

Parkhurst: Well . . . that’s a delicate subject. Obviously anyone in a situation where they are trying to manage a change in their physical health is unlikely to be focused on . . . ah . . . that part of their life. The treatment was meant to affect the condition at its root cause – the virus itself. I would say that assuming that the virus –and not some other problem – caused infertility then ideally the treatment would mitigate that effect as well. However, if the virus had already caused some sort of damage to that. . ah . . function . . . the treatment would not be able to restore it. Understand that this was not a specific issue that I investigated during my research – since I was much more concerned about directly targeting the cause of the Condition. So, unfortunately I can’t give you anything specific about that issue.

Lovejoy: The Foundation was primarily funded by the Harvest Trust, who operate mainly out of the Midwest and deal with agricultural matters. Why were they interested in studying this disease?

Parkhurst: [Shortly after Mrs. Weiss was brought into Buffalo General, several of her friends arrived. Among them was Carl Ellis who founded and funds the Harvest Trust. It was Mr. Ellis who asked me to head a research facility in the hopes of helping Mrs. Weiss and the others who have the Condition. Mr. Ellis put it onto the Harvest Trust agenda, in order to keep things clean for the public records.]

Lovejoy: Given that you are apparently capable of recreating your work well enough to create duplicate versions of your notes, why is this particular notebook so important?

Parkhurst: It’s true enough that I could recreate most of the work from memory. However from memory is not nearly as accurate as the original notes that I took at the time the work was being done. And it’s not just the accuracy of numbers or measurements. There are non-empirical observations in those notes. My own personal commentary on the work that was being done at the time, and individual case studies of examinations – as well as work done with the test animals. Any of those things could potentially lead a well-educated researcher to new discoveries. While this sort of research is mostly about scientific testing and trial and error – there is also a part that requires an intuitive leap. A creative spark if you will – and it’s that sort of intangible that the original notes might provide.