World Aids Day - Time To Rethink Prevention, Treatment?
Categories1 December is World Aids Day - time to think about Aids and the virus that is thought by orthodox medicine to be selectively devastating the immune system of ... mainly gays, intravenous drug users and the poor both in the West and in developing countries. Aids campaigners say we need to "raise awareness" about what they describe as a sexually transmitted disease. They say we need to invest more money to bring drugs to those in the developing countries who can't afford them.
Others are convinced that we should be helping to improve living conditions - sanitation, clean drinking water and basic nutrition. They add that treating the single diseases such as malaria and dysentery and a host of other infections prevalent in poor Africa and rural India would go a long way in eliminating "Aids".
Aids Rethinkers or Aids Denialists?Those suggesting to abandon the fixation on a virus never properly isolated and on highly toxic medications that cause many of the symptoms of "Aids" call themselves Aids rethinkers. A less complimentary term, used by the pro-Aids campaigners to position the independent thinkers is "Aids-denialists". Which of the two camps has truth on their side is hard to say for a casual observer. Greg Hambrick of the Charleston City Paper in a recent article titled Rethinking AIDS - Doubters abandon traditional HIV/AIDS theories and treatment strikes a balance between the two sides and gives an understandable introduction to their respective arguments.
Illustration - Charleston City Paper
Liam Scheff, an independent journalist who exposed scandalous experiments with toxic Aids drugs in a New York home for orphans and wards of the State, has been called an Aids denialist. His articles Inside Incarnation and The Truth about Nevirapine are indictments against human indifference and pharmaceutical profiteering at the cost of lives and untold suffering.Scheff's investigative work has triggered the ire of professional defenders of Aids orthodoxy, of those who sustain the viral paradigm and the chemical solution to the problem. In Correcting The AIDS Lies - Who Is Nick Bennett? Liam challenges one of these self-styled experts who pounce on what they perceive as the enemies of the infective-Aids paradigm.
Is Scheff an Aids denialist because he investigated and published his findings? Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. a program director at the University of Illinois Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell Biology does not think so. In his paper The ABC's of AIDS denialism (it's a rather largish PDF file) Maniotis points up a myriad of inconsistencies in the official dogmatic stance which, summed up, could be described as HIV = AIDS = Retroviral Drugs = Delayed Death. Maniotis takes Montagnier, Gallo and a great number of other supporters of Aids orthodoxy to task for what he says are obvious contradictions and flawed arguments in the science of Aids. It's them who are the denialists, argues Maniotis in a very tongue-in-cheek paper.
In a more succinct but not less convincing way, Malaysian researcher Beldeu Singh sums up the facts of Aids-as-an-infection vs. Aids seen as a condition of cellular stress. His article, Don't Question the Gallo-HIV AIDS Dogma, is in the second part of this post. Beldeu has also written a celebratory piece - showing how Gallo himself has demonstrated that HIV does not attack T-cells and therefore cannot be the cause of Aids:
One trait the Aids rethinkers cum "denialists" have in common is a plea for real prevention and for standard medical treatment of the specific, known diseases that set in when the immune defenses have been down for a considerable period of time.
Real preventionOfficially, Aids prevention involves sexual abstinence, condoms, and even - who would have thought it - circumcision. The use of a cocktail of toxic drugs is also advocated, but there is no word of improving the economic outlook in developing nations, of bettering the living conditions and providing basic nutrition to increase the population's natural resistance. No word of nutrients like selenium and the three amino acids that are found to be low in most Aids patients. Geo-epidemiologist Harold Foster has identified these specific deficiencies as the likely culprit for increased susceptibility to contracting immune deficiency.
Harold Foster - What Really Causes AIDS
But those things are considered inappropriate to even seriously research. No wonder - they are not expected to bring great profits. As a matter of fact, they would tend to ruin a perfectly good business.But the ranks of rethinkers and "denialists" are steadily swelling. Quietly, they are making progress, even without funding from Bill and Melinda. Small scale trials and not-so-small-scale pilot programs to supply needed nutrients such as the efforts of the Dr Rath Foundation in South Africa are showing positive results, derisive hoots and cries by the real denialists notwithstanding.
Don't Question the Gallo-HIV AIDS Dogma, says Beldeu Singh from Malaysia, as he proceeds to tell us how this dogma is full of holes ...... and at the end of this post, you will also find a World Aids Day Message from Dr Leo Rebello.
With all these inconsistencies coming to the surface, this may indeed be a time for re-thinking Aids and our relation to health and disease.
- - -
Image credit - Emma Holister
DON’T QUESTION THE GALLO-HIV AIDS DOGMA
Beldeu SinghAccording to the HIV theory of AIDS, the virus is sexually transmitted and that should produce an HIV-AIDS explosion in the heterosexual population within 25 years. But it did not happen.
This point is well put forth by Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein. Female prostitutes often have 200-300 sexual partners per year and are therefore assumed to have much higher rates of exposure to HIV and AIDS than the vast majority of heterosexuals. Many AIDS researchers assumed that female prostitutes would be the vectors (or means of transmission) of HIV and AIDS to the heterosexual community based on the fact that a single HIV-infected intravenous drug user or bisexual man could infect one female prostitute, who in turn could infect dozens or perhaps even hundreds of non-drug using heterosexual men. These men could, in turn, infect their other sexual partners, and an explosion of HIV and AIDS could occur among people without any obvious risk for AIDS. Paradoxically, no heterosexual epidemic has occurred and no evidence of female prostitutes transmitting HIV or AIDS into the heterosexual community exists for any Western nation. Transmission almost always seems to be drug related. In fact, sexual acquisition of HIV and AIDS among female prostitutes themselves is almost unknown in the absence of concomitant intravenous drug use. Cell-free viral particles have never been found directly in semen. In ‘American Journal of Epidemiology’ (Vol. 146, No.4), Nancy S. Padian et al reported:
“We estimate that HIV infectivity for male-to-female transmission is low, approximately 0.0009 per contact, and that infectivity for female-to-male transmission is even lower.”In New York City, for example, 40 to 50 percent of streetwalkers (a very low caste of prostitute) who have used IV drugs over the past decade are HIV seropositive. Among call girls in New York City (a higher caste of prostitute), no seropositivity was found among those who were drug free. These figures were constant between 1984 and 1989. These statistics have significant implications on the causative factor or factors of AIDS.
The biggest problem in the gallo-HIV theory which says that a pathogenic virus attacks the T4 cells of the immune system is this:
“If HIV is claimed to cause AIDS by killing T-cells, how is it possible that there is mass production of HIV in immortal T-cell lines as shown in the patent in 1984 as source of HIV proteins for “AIDS tests” by Gallo/NIH, Weiss/Burroughs Wellcome (UK), and Montagnier/Pasteur?”If the gallo-HIV actually attacks these infected cell lines, how come they are still producing HIV 21 years later! Here the proponents of the gallo-HIV theory have been saying excactly the opposite - that HIV does not kill cells, just like all other retroviruses. But that does not seem to bother those who hold the gallo-HIV dogma sacred, nor has it stirred a controversy or outcry in the mainstream media!
HIV is not behaving like a typical sexually transmitted disease
There is only one possible conclusion: as Japanese physician Y. Shiokawa has suggested, it is probable that drug use, multiple concurrent diseases, malnutrition, and other immunosuppressive factors are required to increase susceptibility. In fact, it better fits a model based on oxidative stress in cases of malnutrition and selenium deficiency and on oxidative damage and oxidative injury to cells of the immune system and cells in organs targeted by recreational drugs or immunotoxic medication.
The most difficult aspect of the HIV postulate is to have first decided that their HIV virus is an aggressive pathogen - which they claim targets the immune system itself, as HIV was said to in
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
||||
