Health Supreme by Sepp Hasslberger

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Health Supreme

News Blog

Site Map





Food for Thought


Human Potential






The Media

War Crimes


Articles Archive


See also:


Communication Agents:

INACTIVE  Ivan Ingrilli
  Chris Gupta
  Tom Atlee
INACTIVE  Emma Holister
  Rinaldo Lampis
  Steve Bosserman
  CA Journal


Robin Good's
Web sites:












The Individual - Human Ability:


Society - Politics:






September 20, 2007

AIDS Diagnosis Based on Pseudo Science?

Is AIDS caused by a virus or is the immune weakness we observe in some people due to environmental toxins that degrade immune functions and thereby open those affected to the ravages of 'secondary' or 'opportunistic' infections?

The concept of AIDS and especially the idea of a viral cause for immune weakness, stands and falls with our methods of diagnosis. When we tell people they are infected with a virus that must be kept in check with pharmaceutical drugs, we really have little to base such an affirmation on. All we see from the tests is the presence of a certain protein fraction of specific weight that is thought to be associated with the presence of a destructive virus. But is this really the case?


Aids Test - Image:

Well, the protein fraction that is supposed to show the presence of a virus can only be found in about 40 % of "infected" individuals. The virus cannot be isolated from those infected individuals, and whenever something is isolated, it cannot be used to infect healthy individuals, which would be proof that indeed the virus causes the degradation of immune defenses that is typical of AIDS.

Too many questions remain open to confirm that HIV indeed does cause AIDS and that an anti-viral intervention is the proper type of therapy. Beldeu Singh says that AIDS diagnostics are based on pseudo science, and it does not seem he is wrong about that. Here is what he says about the tests:

- - -


Beldeu Singh

The question by Dr Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D. (Program Director in the Cell and Developmental Biology of Cancer, Department of Pathology, and Bioengineering, University of Illinois at Chicago
Chicago, IL 60607) raises the specter of pseudo-science and how it can be used to prey on ignorance and build a multi-billion dollar industry. It is about deciding whether you are HIV-positive based on a cut-off in the reading of a test that tests for the amount of a protein called p24. His poser:-

Can you be "HIV" positive with a value of 2 consecutive tests exceeding or equaling 30pg/ml (picograms per milliliter) p24 protein versus 29pg/ml of p24 protein, and do you need toxic antiretroviral if you have a consistent value of 30pg/ml value versus a consistent p24 value of 29pg/ml or lower? Why are healthy control cells considered by the DAIDS culturing manual to be 29pg/ml or less on consecutive tests while diseased, 'HIV' infected cells are valued at 30pg/ml or more (*see below).

Does anyone know if these women who were dissuaded from breast feeding and who tested positive for "HIV" were tested according to The DAIDS 1997 official "HIV" culturing manual, where it says, under quality control, Section VI, page 45, "Do not use PHA stimulated PBMC older than 3 days post stimulation when testing them for the absence of HIV from your healthy donor source," and in the Reporting Results Section (section VII), a rationale follows that apparently employs both healthy (or non-infected cells) and infected cells-although I don't think anybody tests intentionally non-"infected cells") in a manner that is rational or what we would considered CONTROLLED. For example:

Cultures whose supernatant meet one of the following criteria are considered culture positive IF:

"Two consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values of > 30 pg/ml (read: from a healthy donor source), of which the second value is at least four times greater than the first value or "out of range" (O.D.>2); Or

"Two consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values (read: from a healthy donor source) that are "out of range (Optical density.> 2); Or

"Three consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values of > 30 pg/ml (read: from a healthy donor source), where neither consecutive value is > four times the previous sample, but the third value is at least four times greater than the first,"

Would you consider a sample negative (read: from a healthy donor source) if the 3 consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA corrected values read (first test) 25 pg/ml, and (second test) 15 pg/ml, (third test) 5 pg/ml?

Would you use these cells as uninfected controls?

Asked another way, are these control cells considered non-infected if they read 25 on the first reading, and 15 on the second and 5 on the third?

Try a second sample using the first criterion stated above: (And the poser becomes more intriguing).

"Two consecutive HIV p24 antigen VQA CORRECTED values of > 30 pg/ml, of which the second value is at least four times greater than the first value or out of range" (O.D.>2)

First sample =6pg/ml: second sample) = 23pg/ml

Yes? No? Maybe better get other "healthy cells" than go with a 6 and a 23? Or are these two readings enough to say, "Aw-what the heck-they aren't over 30pg/ml and the second series isn't quite 4 times greater than the first value of 6, so I will just tell the doc that they are negative, and will tell the patient nothing about it?

With much appreciation,

Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D.
Program Director in the Cell and Developmental Biology of Cancer
Department of Pathology and Bioengineering
University of Illinois at Chicago
Chicago, IL 60607

Well, pseudo-science does work if you have institutions behind you or rather in front of you to endorse the tests. After all, most people and politicians are not science literate up to that level at which they will pose questions based on basic science that can help reveal the truth and reveal whether the test is based on science or pseudo-science. And there is no need to worry about the doctors who will recommend these tests and prescribe the pharmaceutically prescribed “medication”. Doctors are not always scientists. Most of them are not trained as researchers or scientists. They are trained to administer the test and prescribe.

The first part of the AIDS pseudo-science is found in a statement by Dr. Gallo. Dr Robert Gallo, the American government researcher whose team developed and marketed the first test kits, says in a letter in this month’s Harper’s that "no test in medicine is perfect, but done correctly and with a confirmatory second test, the HIV blood test developed in our laboratory comes close." The fact is there are no confirmatory tests. The so-called "confirmatory test", called western blot, relied on the same principle as the test kits it was supposed to be checking and so was liable to the same kind of false-positive reactions. These test kits carry the same disclaimer - that they cannot be used to diagnose and treat AIDS. Subsequent research has repeatedly confirmed this problem: more than 60 conditions that cause such false-positives have been documented. One is malaria. Another is flu. Another is tuberculosis, which produces symptoms of AIDS as defined in Africa and is immensely widespread among impoverished people (see HIV Test Bogus - Based on Circular Reasoning, May 23 2006, Health Supreme).

Palamara et al, investigated the effect of glutathione on the replication of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in chronically infected macrophages, a known reservoir of the virus in the body [AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 1996 Nov 1;12(16):1537-41] and found that exogenous GSH strongly suppresses the production of p24 protein. That is an interesting link between glutathione (GSH), an antioxidant enzyme produced in the body and p24. The higher the amount of exogenous GSH the lower the amount of p24 the body will produce. Similarly if the patient gets bioavailable selenium which is essential to the production of glutathione in the body the level of p24 will decline. So, is the p24 part of the body’s antioxidant defense mechanism and an indication of low glutathione or is it an antigen that indicates a viral infection? Take into account the fact that it is not viral specific and not specific to the HIV ((see: Are Malnutrition and Oxidative Stress the Cause of gp41, gp120 and gp160 in Robert Gallo's HIV Isolate?)

As I predicted (see: AIDS, NON-HIV AIDS AND PRESCRIPTION AIDS), there will never be a vaccine for AIDS - "The only logical hypothesis is that toxic chemicals, whether or not they are approved for medication, if they generate free radicals in the body that decrease white blood cell count or kill T4 cells or damage the cell walls of cells of the immune system or the endocrine system will generate AIDS. It results in immune deficiencies or immune disorders or damage to the genetic material and explains the variation of the symptoms of AIDS and that also means there will be no such thing as an AIDS vaccine". How can there be a vaccine for a condition that is precipitated by excess free radicals? But what is peculiar to these HIV tests?

“It never proved possible to validate the tests by culturing, purifying and analyzing particles of the purported virus from patients who test positive, then demonstrating that these are not present in patients who test negative. This was despite heroic efforts to make the virus reveal itself in patients with Aids or at risk of Aids, in which their immune cells were stimulated for weeks in laboratory cultures using a variety of agents.

After the cells had been activated in this way, HIV pioneers found some 30 proteins in filtered material that gathered at a density characteristic of retroviruses. They attributed some of these to various parts of the virus. But they never demonstrated that these so-called "HIV antigens" belonged to a new retrovirus.

So, out of the 30 proteins, how did they select the ones to be defined as being from HIV? The answer is shocking, and goes to the root of what is probably the biggest scandal in medical history. They selected those that were most reactive with antibodies in blood samples from Aids patients and those at risk of Aids.

This means that "HIV" antigens are defined as such not on the basis of being shown to belong to HIV, but on the basis that they react with antibodies in Aids patients. Aids patients are then diagnosed as being infected with HIV on the basis that they have antibodies” (see: HIV Test Bogus - Based on Circular Reasoning, May 23 2006, Health Supreme).

The circular reasoning appears sound but there is science to suggest or even clearly indicate that the Gallo isolate does not contain a virus but possibly polymer actin proteins produced by white blood cells under oxidative stress, the kind of oxidative stress found in malnourished people and in people recovering from malaria or flu etc. The antibodies in such people are an auto-immune response of their body to these polymer proteins. Hence they respond clinically to proper nutritional interventions (see: Are Malnutrition and Oxidative Stress the Cause of gp41, gp120 and gp160 in Robert Gallo's HIV Isolate?). Now they are saying that they have only detected virus particles.

The AIDS posse claims that the HIV is an enveloped virus but to date no one has seen it under the electron microscope and no one has observed its budding process. It is supposed to be a big virus, because they claim that it is complex and can integrate its genetic material into the host DNA and later on this genetic material can slice itself out and become re-activated. All these processes require an intricate enzyme system. Such enzymes have not been proven either.

And there are many AIDS sufferers who do not have the virus that the AIDS posse claims is virulent and targets the immune system and impairs it sufficiently to allow opportunistic infections to establish in the patients, especially carcinomas and infections of the lungs. Yet 5000 researchers recently signed a document declaring that the HIV is the sole cause of AIDS. Such is the power of pseudo-science.

Basic secondary school science education can equip you to know that for a virus or any pathogen to be the sole cause of a disease, it must be found in every patient and it must be isolated and used to re-infect healthy hosts to prove that it is in fact the sole agent causing the disease. Dr. Gallo has testified that the so called HIV virus is found in only 40% of the cases and it is not detected directly but its existence is assumed by only looking for the p24 protein in the supernatants. And is that protein merely a protein or an antigen…well lets see…by studying their recommended diagnostic test as described above by Dr Andrew Maniotis.

So…must you be given toxic antiretroviral drugs when you have 30pg/ml p24 protein versus 29pg/ml of p24 protein or if you have a consistent value of 30pg/ml value versus a consistent p24 value of 29pg/ml or lower? And if they read 25 on the first reading and 15 on the second and 5 on the third are you to be treated as non-infected?

If the antigen is virus specific as they claim it to be, then why must the diagnosis be based on the amount of p24 protein rather than on its presence or absence? Why? I hope your doctor or your health authorities can explain that to you. It cannot be an antigen specific to the HIV and it may be nothing more than a polymer actin protein associated with oxidative stress. .

It appears to be a case of a bogus virus and a bogus antigen with bogus tests that have established a legitimate industry.

- - -

For a listing of other articles by Beldeu Singh, see

Alternatives to AZT in Aids Patients

(scroll down to the end of that article)

- - -

A recent article:

Merck's Experimental AIDS Vaccine Fails
"It's very disappointing news," said Keith Gottesdiener, head of Merck's clinical infectious disease and vaccine research group. "A major effort to develop a vaccine for HIV really did not deliver on the promise."

Comments Croft W. from Canada: "Since HIV/AIDS emerged in the early '80s, all known and accepted scientific investigative techniques have failed to prove the existence of a virus. No electron photograph (micrograph) of an isolated HIV particle has ever been published." He asks the question no one seems to ask : "....if an HIV vaccine is ever developed that does not injure or kill, how will anyone know that it works? By testing HIV–positive?" adding "... to produce a vaccine one must have a virus. No virus, no vaccine, no Nobel Prize!"

Vince Boehm (in the US) also comments in a similar manner:

Pharmaceutical research these days hinges on hypotheses. And failed hypotheses are routinely ignored. Consider the Dopamine Hypothesis, the Serotonin Hypothesis and many others. These are all failed hypotheses.

Many AIDS activists consider the HIV/AIDS hypothesis a failed hypothesis as well. But after 26 years the industry keeps plugging along grinding out things to clobber the HIV virus. This is certainly puzzling considering the shakiness of the original hypothesis and the fact that this hypothetical virus has never been isolated so a weakened version can be used as a vaccine.

This is massively alarming in light of the mortality outcomes prior to 1985 when substances of far greater toxicity were used to treat this presumed relationship between HIV and AIDS.

The Pharmas refuse to reconsider the basic question of whether HIV actually causes AIDS.


Curiouser and curiouser? You bet. This fits well into my Dodo theory. I have a huge problem with hypotheses that masquerade as "science". Only the gullible accept the hypothetical as scientific fact.

This is a contest of sorts with an enormous pot of gold as its prize.

In Lewis Carrol's Alices Adventures in Wonderland a number of the characters got wet at one point.

The dodo decided to issue a competition. All were to run around a lake until they were dry. Nobody cared to measure how far or long they they had run.

When they asked the dodo who had won, he gave this question thoughtful consideration and announced, "Everyone has won and all must have prizes."

Now comes financially beleagered Merck with a vaccine that was purported to prevent the HIV virus. It failed because in did not perform much better than the placebo.

Nowhere was the basic question asked.

Does the HIV virus actually cause AIDS?

As the lady once said, "Curiuoser and Curiouser?


- - -

And Liam Scheff has posted his comments to the vaccine failure on his blog under the title

Vaccine Blues - The Aids Crusade Moves On

- - -

Beldeu Singh responds to Liam Scheff explaining why there cannot logically be a vaccine against HIV


- - -

See also:

Aids Incorporated (2007) by Gary Null
The cost in the war against AIDS has now surpassed the financial investment committed to cardiovascular diseases and diverse cancers. While the science supporting the causes of heart disease and many cancers are relatively conclusive within the medical research community, the etiology of AIDS remains questionable. Simultaneously, a safe cure is no closer in sight today than it was when the disease first burst on the scene three decades ago. Yet the perception of a global AIDS epidemic looms in the minds of the media, medical associations and government leaders.

Today there is a rapidly growing body of physicians, medical researchers, virologists, journalists and activists who are starting to voice their opposition to the prevailing scientific paradigm of AIDS and who are calling for a reevaluation of the medical research, epidemiological evidence, diagnostic methodologies and treatments. These voices-now numbering over 5,000, including a couple Nobel Prize laureates-have been virtually shunned by the medical academies and major peer-reviewed publications.


posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Thursday September 20 2007
updated on Wednesday November 24 2010

URL of this article:


Related Articles

Why I Quit HIV - Is AIDS Myth Falling Apart?
A Canadian mathematical biologist working as an Assistant Professor of Mathematics at University of Texas at Tyler, who has lived and breathed the theory of Aids and HIV infection for practically all of her professional life, has announced that she "quit HIV". Click for larger image Cartoon by Emma Holister There are a number of reasons for Rebecca Culshaw's decision - none of them should be a surprise to regulars... [read more]
May 03, 2006 - Sepp Hasslberger

HIV-Aids: A Tragic Error
Recently, a friend from the UK sent a copy of an article published in the Observer, titled: "UK firm tried HIV drug on orphans" which details experiments with toxic AIDS drugs on orphans in New York, involving the British drug giant GlaxoSmithKline. Reading the article I forwarded to some people, a medical doctor friend has the following to say: "I see nothing wrong with this. At least the children received... [read more]
April 12, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

Aids Test Unscientific: Test Kit Makers Sued in Kansas
The test kits used to determine "HIV positive" status in patients are deeply flawed - they were developed on the basis of faulty scientific methodology and assumptions and are without value in determining whether a person suffers from "HIV Aids", alleges Kim Marie Bannon in a civil suit filed under the Consumer Protection Act of the State of Kansas, US. The legal action against the makers of Aids test kits... [read more]
April 27, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

AIDS Test 'Is Not Proof Of Infection'
The "Aids Test", which was originally developed to make the blood supply safe and has only been really licensed for that use, is not a test that can give certainty of infection of any individual. A possible "positive" result certainly should not be used to initiate any "treatment" regimen, especially if such treatment is based on drugs that have - as side effects - some of the symptoms often associated... [read more]
June 13, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

'Global Business Coalition' Wants More Testing: But Tests Do Not Show AIDS
BANGKOK - 15th International AIDS Conference: "Testing is the missing link," said Trevor Neilson, executive director of the Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS, representing 150 companies around the world, according to an article on Reuters, calling for routine HIV testing on a large scale. There is only one problem: No AIDS virus has been scientifically isolated as yet - incredible but true - and therefore available tests can not be... [read more]
July 10, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

AIDS: 'No Gold Standard' For HIV Testing
According to the scientific literature, there is no "gold standard" for HIV tests. Liam Scheff, who has exposed how children are removed from their parents' care and forcibly drugged with highly toxic anti-retrovirals insists that testing for HIV does not mean a thing. A "positive" test result could merely "confirm that you are pregnant or have used drugs or alcohol, or that you’ve been vaccinated; that you have a cold,... [read more]
January 13, 2005 - Sepp Hasslberger




Readers' Comments

It has been 25 years and billions spent on research on the so-called HIV. However, immunologists have yet to produce a vaccine that is safe for adults and small children.

To vector a vaccine one must have a virus. Thousands of eminent scientists, including Nobel Prize Laureates, claim they have yet to be convinced that HIV exists.

No virus, no vaccine and no Nobel Prize.

Immunology teaches if one tests antibody positive to an infection one is presumed to have been exposed to a disease causing bacteria or virus. One\'s body, having responded with antibodies, is assumed to have immunity accordingly.

If the Robert Gallo\'s, etc., could produce a vaccine that does not injure or kill - how would they be able to tell that it offers protection? By testing HIV positive?

Immunology has turned itself on its head.

Posted by: Croft Woodruff on September 20, 2007 04:38 PM


Sepp: In light of all the information you have which shows that HIV/AIDS is not a virus but a synthetic biological agent, a weapon of the United States, you have just cashed in your chips.

In light of substantial information to the contrary, I am not surprised that you are now showing your true colors.

For the record, sir, the U.S. caused HIV/AIDS. That is the first issue you have never addressed. Second, HIV/AIDS is the synthetic biological agent funded by the U.S. on June 9, 1969. See page 129, U.S. House Resolution 15090.

Sepp, I was hopeful you were not one of them, but your actions and misdirection speaks volumes for itself.

Sepp, When will you call for the review of the U.S. Special Virus program (1962 - 1978)?
Boyd Ed Graves, J.D.

Posted by: Boyd Ed Graves, J.D. on September 21, 2007 03:58 PM


Here is a comment by Boyd Graves, who has researched the US program to develop a race specific pathogen in the years prior to the outbreak of the first AIDS cases, and my reply...

The exchange starts with a message by Steven Zakrzewski from Canada:

Sepp has been in your group, listening but never saying anything.
Now, he has published this.
What\'s your opinion?

- - -

Boyd Graves than says:

Sepp: In light of all the information you have which shows that HIV/AIDS is not a virus but a synthetic biological agent, a weapon of the United States, you have just cashed in your chips.

In light of substantial information to the contrary, I am not surprised that you are now showing your true colors.

For the record, sir, the U.S. caused HIV/AIDS. That is the first issue you have never addressed. Second, HIV/AIDS is the synthetic biological agent funded by the U.S. on June 9, 1969. See page 129, U.S. House Resolution 15090.

Sepp, I was hopeful you were not one of them, but your actions and misdirection speaks volumes for itself.

Sepp, When will you call for the review of the U.S. Special Virus program (1962 - 1978)?
Boyd Ed Graves, J.D.

- - -

My reply to Boyd Graves:


you have your viewpoint (that HIV was developed as part of a US government biological warfare program) and you assume that anyone who has a different view than yours must be an enemy agent, one of \"them\".

I am sympathetic to your view and believe that there indeed WAS an intention and a program to develop such a virus. But that is how far it goes. Not all virus research is successful, actually, most of it comes to some dead end. Having followed the AIDS disaster from its beginning and keeping fairly close tabs on developments, it is my considered opinion that yes, there WAS a program to develop such a virus, and that no, the program did not come up with a usable virus. Nevertheless, AIDS was \'found\' after an experimental hepatitis vaccination program promoted mainly to gay men in some large US cities. The first therapeutic intervention was highly toxic AZT, which has been the cause of many deaths of the unfortunate victims of AIDS.

I have no resistance to looking into the original program that sought to develop a race specific virus, and indeed I have published some articles on my site that take up this angle of the AIDS disaster:

AIDS Called Black Genocide - US Special Virus Program Chart Vindicates Maathai

Wangari Maathai: Nobel Calls AIDS \'Weapon Of Mass Destruction\'

AIDS \'Made In America\' - Journal of Degenerative Diseases

But I do personally believe that the damage we see in AIDS is not caused by a retrovirus called HIV. It is due to drug abuse, toxic medications, environmental toxins and other immune weakening causes, and more often than not, the patient dies because his/her immune system is further weakened by highly toxic \"retroviral\" drugs such as AZT, Nevirapine and others.

Nutritional intervention, in the absence of retroviral drugs has shown great results in keeping people \"symptom free\", that is, in keeping them from ever developing what is known as AIDS.

The tests used to determine whether someone is infected or not are NOT capable of detecting the presence of a virus. They are calibrated to respond to stressed protein fractions, nothing else, and they are interpreted not just by test result but also by whether the patient is part of a \"risk group\" or not.

The whole thing is a huge fraud and genocide perpetrated by the same people who were intent on developing a race-specific virus, and the result is a lot of death and suffering, especially by black people, because they have officially been declared to be one of the \"risk groups\".

To me, the debate whether a virus causes AIDS or whether biased tests and toxic medicines are to blame is really missing the point. The fact is that there is a genocidal agenda to reduce the population, with emphasis on people of African origin. Whether they are killed by a highly virulent retrovirus (an oxymoron in itself - retrovira are non virulent and for the most part rather benign) or whether the killing is done by toxic medication must pass into the secondary plane in view of the necessity to expose the genocidal agenda.

You are doing your part in pointing to the original program of the US government to develop a race specific pathogen. I think we can document the INTENT to manufacture a virus, but we cannot document the outcome of the program that was supposed to find that pathogen. But we CAN point to the pharmaceutical killing of large numbers of victims in the name of AIDS, and we CAN point to the fact that several nutrients, which are found lacking in AIDS patients, if supplied, will prevent and even reverse the condition.

No one, as I see it, has an exclusive on knowing all about AIDS. So let\'s do both - expose the original research program and expose how AIDS victims are currently being killed by toxic pharmaceutical intervention. You are pushing the original program, others are looking into how people die and why, and what can be done to prevent that or help the victims. Both approaches are valid, and both should go ahead.

Posted by: Sepp on September 23, 2007 10:27 AM


The HIV test is vague.
Because genomic hypomethylation makes our own HERV-K retrovirus come out whether with cancer or autoimmune disease it all gets confused.

"The coordinate changes of LINE-1 and HERV-K DNA methylation suggest that hypomethylation in urothelial cancer affects a variety of different retroelements to similar extents."
DNA methylation and expression of LINE-1 and HERV-K provirus sequences in urothelial and renal cell carcinomas

HERV-K is used as a marker for Multiple Sclerosis and rises in parallel with HIV.

"HERV-K(HML-2) viral RNA sequences were found almost universally in HIV-1(+) plasma samples (95.33)"
Detection of HERV-K(HML-2) viral RNA in plasma of HIV type 1-infected individuals.
(Pub Med)

HIV could be a racially specific endogenous retrovirus?

Whatever we believe the fact is that when people get ill their genome tends to get hypomethylated, something that dietary Selenium helps to correct. We also get an increase in our own retroviruses when ill and the HIV test has always picked up our own retroviruses as well.

Posted by: Cal Crilly on September 24, 2007 01:13 AM


Another exchange (by email) with Boyd Graves on the question of HIV being a synthetic biological agent...

On 23/set/07, at 22:44, Boyd Graves wrote:

Sepp: In exposing the original research program we then need to see an article from you on the \"bullseye\" of the solid evidence, that being U.S. House Resolution 15090, page 129.

What this page in the Congressional Record proves is that HIV/AIDS is not a virus at all, but a \"synthetic biological agent\". The problem here is that this Pentagon sworn testimony has been available to you for some time to no avail, solely to allow the quack secondary discussion of further befuddlement.

Download the flowchart and join our call for review of the U.S. Special Virus program. Spread the word for \"clinical trials\" of U.S. patent# 5676977

Carry the Challenge to the Perth Group. The answer you and they seek is located on page 105 of progress report #8 (1971), U.S. Special Virus program.

I personally can not recall any prior opinion of yours on visna or the cure. For visna, see Science VOl 227, pp. 173 - 7, January 1985.

Sepp, if you will look a little deeper, you will find that HIV/AIDS \"evolved\" from \"ungulate diseases\" (like visna, EIAV, CAEV). This further shows it is the product of \"recombinant genetics\". As an aside, Sepp, progress report #15 (1978) says that the 1909 Rous Sarcoma Virus is also man made. See, pages 14 - 15.

Your leader, Dr. Duesberg, not Tom Cruise, is listed in the progress reports of the Special Virus program. You can understand a blown cover is cover. In light of what is readily available, yes sir, I do have concerns and questions about your desire to save the Black race. Let\'s go on to Perth. We have a lot to show.

Boyd Ed Graves,
619-849-9364 expert reviews

My reply:


you are welcome to develop the evidence that there really WAS a synthetic biological agent that came out of the US research program and that is capable of ruining people\'s normal immune reactions and causing the diverse illnesses that have been lumped together under the name of AIDS.

Unfortunately, page 129 of the 1969 H.B. 15090 is purely speculative as to the possibility of making such a synthetic biological agent. Quoted from the document:

\"...eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent...\"

\"Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism...\"

\"It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the field.\"


This sounds extremely speculative to me.

Certainly it does not constitute evidence that such an agent was indeed developed and was indeed effective as postulated by the \"eminent biologists\".

You are a lawyer, Boyd, and you know the standards of evicence needed to prove something. This isn\'t it.

If anything, the document can prove that there was an INTENTION to develop such an agent, but it says nothing as to whether that program actually got underway and more importantly, it says nothing as to the final outcome of the program, if indeed it was undertaken and if indeed it was successful.

Certainly there is no published scientific characterization and isolation of what has been named HIV, nor has anyone offered even a shred of explanation as to how HIV, which is a relatively harmless and little infective retrovirus, manages to attack the immune system.

Until those important questions are resolved, I hold to my view that AIDS has been sold to us by heavy propaganda and that the \"cure\" (highly toxic retrovirals) is what kills most of the patients.

Kind regards

Posted by: Sepp on September 24, 2007 10:09 AM


Security code:

Please enter the security code displayed on the above grid

Due to our anti-spamming policy the comments you are posting will show up online within few hours from the posting time.



The Individual Is Supreme And Finds Its Way Through Intuition


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes. Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice before utilizing any of the information to cure or mitigate disease. Any copyrighted material cited is used strictly in a non commercial way and in accordance with the "fair use" doctrine.



Enter your Email

Powered by FeedBlitz



Most Popular Articles
Lipitor: Side Effects And Natural Remedy

Lipitor - The Human Cost

Fluoride Accumulates in Pineal Gland

Original blueprints for 200 mpg carburetor found in England

Medical system is leading cause of death and injury in US

Aspartame and Multiple Sclerosis - Neurosurgeon's Warning

'Bird Flu', SARS - Biowarfare or a Pandemic of Propaganda?



More recent articles
Chromotherapy in Cancer

Inclined Bed Therapy: Tilt your bed for healthful sleep

European Food Safety Authority cherry picks evidence - finds Aspartame completely safe

Did Aspartame kill Cory Terry?

Retroviral particles in human immune defenses - is AIDS orthodoxy dead wrong?

Vaccine damage in Great Britain: The consequences of Dr Wakefield’s trials

Archive of all articles on this site



Most recent comments
Uganda: Pfizer Sponsored AIDS Institute Snubs Natural Treatment Options

Lipitor: Side Effects And Natural Remedy

AIDS: 'No Gold Standard' For HIV Testing

Lipitor: Side Effects And Natural Remedy

'Global Business Coalition' Wants More Testing: But Tests Do Not Show AIDS



Candida International

What Does MHRA Stand For??

Bono and Bush Party without Koch: AIDS Industry Makes a Mockery of Medical Science

Profit as Usual and to Hell with the Risks: Media Urge that Young Girls Receive Mandatory Cervical Cancer Vaccine


Share The Wealth

Artificial Water Fluoridation: Off To A Poor Start / Fluoride Injures The Newborn

Drinking Water Fluoridation is Genotoxic & Teratogenic

Democracy At Work? - PPM On Fluoride

"Evidence Be Damned...Patient Outcome Is Irrelevant" - From Helke

Why Remove Fluoride From Phosphate Rock To Make Fertilizer


Evolving Collective Intelligence

Let Us Please Frame Collective Intelligence As Big As It Is

Reflections on the evolution of choice and collective intelligence

Whole System Learning and Evolution -- and the New Journalism

Gathering storms of unwanted change

Protect Sources or Not? - More Complex than It Seems



Islanda, quando il popolo sconfigge l'economia globale.

Il Giorno Fuori dal Tempo, Il significato energetico del 25 luglio

Rinaldo Lampis: L'uso Cosciente delle Energie

Attivazione nei Colli Euganei (PD) della Piramide di Luce

Contatti con gli Abitanti Invisibili della Natura


Diary of a Knowledge Broker

Giving It Away, Making Money

Greenhouses That Change the World

Cycles of Communication and Collaboration

What Is an "Integrated Solution"?

Thoughts about Value-Add




Best sellers from