There is an almost daily barrage of catastrophic news on new diseases and threats to our health. AIDS, BSE (Mad Cow Disease), Foot and Mouth Disease in Cows, SARS, Anthrax, Smallpox, you name it! Many of these scares are manufactured by the very authorities that should be preventing them. Something is definitely awry here.
It is hard to make sense of the numerous contradictions in the official explanation of what causes Aids and how to best fight the scourge. But then - the confusion may be fully intentional. Aids as a strategy and cover for de-population would make perfect sense. It is race specific, its victims are the poor and socially deviant, and if we believe the press, the whole population of the African continent is at grave risk. A high percentage of those treated eventually do die. What they die of is the hard question that must be asked.
Aids testing, prevention and treatment are promoted by the medical/pharmaceutical world and by the mainstream press as essential counter-measures. Yet both Aids testing and treatment target certain racial and social groups and the populations of developing countries, especially if they are located on the African continent.
The interpretation of test results is largely arbitrary. Prevention consists of giving both mother and child a highly toxic shot of medicine, and treatment - more often than not - seals the fate of the victim. Treatment leads to a more or less certain death. All that is promised is that the death will be slowed by "life extending" drugs.
What makes me think of a deliberate strategy with regards to Aids and the confusion that surrounds it, is the point-blank refusal of the reigning pharmaceutical/medical establishment to even address those contradictions, to discuss in an open way with those who point out that something's not right. Perhaps I am too suspicious, but it seems to me that so much bungling cannot be the result of mere inadequacy.
Contradictions, Contradictions
Some of the most egregious contradictions I have found over the years are:
Tests identify people who "have Aids" but they do not find a virus, merely some specific proteins that could be (and apparently are) associated with a host of non-Aids conditions.
The interpretation of tests is different for people with different life stories. Likelihood of a positive test result is increased by being gay or promiscuous, by being of African descent or just by living in a poor part of town, yet "universal testing" is being advocated.
In Africa, the definition of Aids does not rely on a test. It is sufficient if you have the symptoms of several of the diseases that are rampant there, diseases brought on by poor hygiene and by bad nutrition.
Instead of helping Africans overcome the endemic diseases of their continent with better sanitation and freshly grown produce, we send them toxic Aids drugs and industrially produced, often genetically modified grains.
Prevention and treatment of Aids are always highly toxic. More Aids victims die of iatrogenic liver disease brought on by the doctor-prescribed pharmaceutical drugs than of the "opportunistic" diseases that a failing immune system is said to bring on.
People who refuse treatment often do not get ill - especially if they adopt a healthy lifestyle - some have been documented to stay healthy for decades.
Most people who take Aids drugs suffer horrible "side effects", among them immune deficiency brought on by the drugs. They also die early. Yet no studies have been done to compare a natural, healthy regimen of nutrition and good life with the recommended antiretroviral drug treatment.
The isolation of the viral entity that is said to cause Aids has never been published in a peer-review journal. The virus cannot be isolated from sick individuals. No one has shown how the viral entity actually CAUSES immune deficiency. Yet a Nobel prize has recently been awarded to Luc Montagnier and a collaborator for the discovery of HIV.
That rabbit hole is very deep. The more you dig, the more absolutely incomprehensible facts and contradictions emerge.
One of the most articulate critics of the Aids orthodoxy is Dr Andrew Maniotis, a Professor of Pathology and Program Director in the University of Chicago's Department of Pathology, Anatomy, Cell Biology and Bioengineering.
In the following piece, Dr Maniotis highlights the failures of the paradigm that says Aids is caused by an infective agent called HIV and it must be treated with anti-retroviral drugs. In the second part of this post, Dr Maniotis comments on an article in the New Statesman that comments on the controversy around Aids.
Perhaps I should be clear that Dr Maniotis, while pointing at the various inconsistencies, does not advocate any conspiratorial view of Aids. If I imply such a conspiratorial (de-population) connection, that view is mine alone.
The failures of the HIV/Aids hypothesis
According to former NIH director, and Nobel Laureate, Harold Varmus who formed the committee that named “HIV” “HIV,” retrovirus-derived DNA sequences (genes that come from viruses whose genes are made out of RNA instead of DNA), may be ancient molecular “parasites” in their associations with other organisms. As such, they may not be recognizable as foreign molecules to the human immune system (which explains the STEP trial and 60 other "HIV" vaccine disasters, perfectly).
Thus, “retroviruses” or their components are not immunogenic (capable of being seen as foreign by the human immune system), because “HIV’'s” molecules, and those of other “retroviruses” are not seen as foreign or non-self,” because they are, and always have been, part of the incredible repertory of the combinatorial complexity of the normal human genome. Supposedly, if we are around on this planet millions of years from now, the human immunoglobulin cassette (that part of the T-cell genome that immunologists claim can be instantaneously rearranged to respond to foreign antigens) new immuonglobulins will continuously be produced to counter any “foreign” molecular challenge, which are not yet present on this earth yet. Therefore, we have NOT sequenced the total human genome, because some of it’s sequences don’t yet exist. And they may not exist in persons said to have “AIDS,” hepatitis B or C or D, as a response to a foreign virus, but these signatures may instead represent the breakdown products of autoimmune diseases that cause cells to spit out “virus-like particles.”
As molecular parasites, and as response of our own cellular reactions to common diseases, foreign proteins or metabolic and even psychological stressors such as an AIDS or cancer death sentence, “retroviruses,” their genes, and their molecules, may be simply a byproduct of our stressed cells, because they always have been, are, and always will be, made by our own cells.
The amazing thing is that: some antiretroviral drug regimens in some people (almost half of them it appears) can stop the cells from producing these stress responses and their consequent virus-like particles as shown in the German drug addiction clinics by Heinrich Kremer and Juliana Sacher. But these doctors warn, when taken long-term, HAART will cause damage to the bone marrow and others systems, as literally dozens of mainstream clinical trials have demonstrated.
It isn’'t only the 60 vaccine failures that raise issue with the “HIV=AIDS” hypothesis. And it isn’'t that cures for cancer or “HIV-disease” have been foiled in every case by “mutation.”
Other failures of the “HIV=AIDS” hypothesis include:
The failure to really isolate “HIV,” from all other objects in the Universe, or to explain what its confusing presence in healthy drug-naïve persons means;
The failure to appreciate, that the association of a molecular marker with any disease state, does not prove, disprove, or even suggest causality;
The failure of the Nobel committee to appreciate, in the case of Montagnier’'s and Barre-Sinoussi’'s recent award of the Nobel Prize, that their Patient One’'s “viral” isolate,” was derived from a fellow with swollen lymph nodes, a history of syphilis and syphilis treatment the year before, a history of gonorrhea, a history of cytomegalovirus infection, a
history of herpes I and II infection, a history of Epstein-Barr virus infection, and God knows what else;
The failure to appreciate, in the case of Robert Gallo'’s so-called amplification of “HIV” markers in stimulated tumor-cell cultures not killed by “HIV,” that “HIV markers” are detectable in less than half to a third of of 72 healthy persons, and not persons now considered to be AIDS patients. And as shocking as it is, a failure to appreciate that there still is no rational or acceptable cell culture model or method to grow HIV” in Petri dishes;
The failure of the Nobel committee to appreciate that,
a) “HPV” (human papilloma viruses) molecular sequences that are sometimes associated with cervical cancers are just that: they are molecular sequences, not Human papilloma viruses. HPV virus particles, to date have not been shown to induce cervical cells or any other kind of cells to become cancerous, and
b) the failure of the Nobel Committee to acknowledge and heed the widely publicized warnings in the Journal “College of American Pathologists (CAP),” and also by senior investigators at the National Cancer Institute, and the company Digene who make “HPV” molecular tests, that HPV-sequences” have not been validated against the clinical occurrence of clinical cervical cancer. In this context, the Nobel committee also failed to appreciate the shameful carnage currently being perpetrated by the so-called first cancer vaccine GARDASIL (made by the same company Merck, who 20 years ago claimed that their hepatitis B vaccine was the first “anti-cancer” vaccine, before France filed a class action suit to stop the hepatitis B vaccine mandate for its young citizens, because it harmed so many);
The failure to sequence the “HIV” genome as a consistent pattern or sequence, or to identify specific proteins that are not also found in normal, “non-infected” contexts;
The failure to inform the public (and most scientists) that reverse transcriptase is not specific to viruses, nor are the gag, pol, env, p24, and other so-called “HIV-specific” genes and their products, which all can be detected in normal, “non-infected” contexts, and which are published on Medline;
The failure
a) to block transmission of “HIV” or AIDS in mother to child transmission studies (MTCT) as shown by the Cochran Meta-analysis and other peer-reviewed reports, which showed increased “HIV mutation rates” after black box label drugs such as nevirapine were discontinued in the U.S., and ashamedly administered to more than eight hundred seventy five thousand African mother-infant pairs by Max Essex of Harvard, and others and
b) the failure to acknowledge or appreciate that safety officers of the NIH, such as Dr. Fishbein, who monitored such trials as a safety officer, were fired, while those individuals such as Edmond Tremont who directed the nevaripine trial(s) were not even reprimanded after he had changed the data in safety reports that Dr. Fishbein and others had uncovered, in order to push forward George Bush’s PEPFAR pogrom and the eugenics pogram on Africans;
The failure to understand why ARV’s (anti-retrovirals) in some individuals, can prevent "AIDS syndromes," because their toxicity to normal immune cells can not only can block these cells from expressing HIV-specific” molecules as a normal response to a physiological stress, or as evidence of a rare genetic polymorphism, but because these drugs are so toxic, that like antibiotics, they suppress both fungal and bacterial growth, but cannot prevent theoretical virus proliferation, because if the HIV” paradigm is correct, these genomes of “HIV” are rapidly integrated into the DNA of the “infected,” and will never be sensitive to drugs designed against their “molecules.”
The failure of microbicides, condom campaigns, and circumcision, that more often than not, have increased the rate of detecting “HIV’s” molecular markers, instead of decreasing them among African human “lab rats;”
The failure to
a) appreciate the disaster and infant mortality caused by breast feeding dissuasion campaigns, designed to decrease infant mortality from “HIV-infection,” but which increased infant mortality 20 times in formula fed infants, compared to mother-infant pairs that didn'’t listen to their doctors, and who weren'’t dissuaded from breast feeding, and
b) the failure to appreciate the corresponding terrorism that has been waged against new mothers to promote formula dumping on 3rd World nations, and perhaps because of a hatred of the human female’s breast and the disgusting nature of breast feeding;
The failure to acknowledge how projected and WHO-manufactured “HIV” and AIDS” prevalence and incidence rates have not materialized, and how they have been recently dismissed by world AIDS leaders such as Kevin de Cock as signaling the end of the “heterosexual AIDS era” (except of course among people of African descent or homosexuals who have been selectively biased during “HIV” testing campaigns, or selectively targeted during HIV-preventative” microbicide or circumcision campaigns, or manufactured from “best guess estimates” based on STD clinics or perinatal clinics);
The failure to explain how “HIV'’s” latency makes sense from a biochemical point of view;
The failure to support the progress of Doctors Without Borders, who recently showed how the cheap food supplement plumpynut, when given to the children of Niger, the poorest nation in Africa, has reversed the infant mortality rate, and without antibiotics or drugs, or without significant funding, as was revealed on 60 minutes;
The failure to develop a consistent in vitro model to detect “HIV” infection;
The failure to develop any “HIV” animal model, while “HIV” exposed chimps now rest in their 27 million dollar retirement homes because they never developed AIDS after injection with AIDS patient sera or “HIV;”
The failure of the biomedical establishment to offer and provide support to pursue and fund at least 17 other hypotheses that have explained or have even reversed in some cases, the development of acute Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome;
The failure to pursue and fund inexpensive treatment regimens such as those developed in the German drug-abuse clinics by Heinrich Kremer, Juliana Sacher, or in Africa in Niger, by Doctors Without Borders who fed starving children plumpynut, and by many others who have shown they can reverse immunosuppression non-toxically, and with a minimum, or in most cases, with a complete lack of HAART;
The failure to appreciate why prostitutes and sex workers don'’t acquire HIV’'s” molecular markers, or develop “AIDS,” unless they are also chronic immunosuppressive illicit or pharmaceutical drug users or abusers;
The failure to account for why Human “HIV” transmission studies have not shown “HIV” or “AIDS” transmission between serodiscordant couples, or among health care workers inoculated with “HIV-tainted” blood, or why the spouses of “HIV-positive” hemophiliacs and “HIV-negative” partners have failed to seroconvert or develop AIDS after numerous unprotected and repeated exposures to their “HIV” positive spouses;
The failure to address the phenomenon announced as recently as February 14th, 2008, in San Diego, California, when the local county health department made quite a big deal out of the fact that all sexually transmitted diseases in their local gay community have risen by an astounding 800 percent since 2003, including syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, while “HIV” infection rates have dropped since 2003 in the very same gay community;
The failure to explain how there can be large numbers of so-called Long-Term-Non-Progressors, or Elite Controllers, who never acquire any illness, although they may test positive for “HIV’s” molecular signature for more than two decades, or how it is possible that ICL-AIDS patients to test negative for “HIV” but who are thought to have “AIDS;”
The failure to account for how T-cell numbers or “viral load” don'’t indicate any effect of a viral presence or infection, or explain why viral load continues to be aggressively monitored despite the fact that no virus has ever been observed in the blood of a so-called “HIV-positive” individual harboring high “viral load” as measured by PCR (polymerase chain reaction);
The failure of the AIDS establishment or Nobel committee to acknowledge the significance of the recent Semmelweis “clean hands” award to Peter Duesberg for initially alerting the scientific community as to the impossibility of the “HIV=AIDS” hypothesis, and to appreciate the significance of the co-presentation of that award to investigative journalist, Celia Farber, for her initial expose regarding the iatrogenocide committed against gay men during the high-dose AZT era;
And finally, the failure of “The AIDS Establishment” or “AID$ incorporated,” to address in any invited public forum, or in the media, why none of their more than 33 “HIV” test kits first initially patented and launched by Robert Gallo and Abbott Laboratories claim they can’'t detect “HIV,” and continue to state on their package inserts, that the significance of “HIV’'s” molecular signature is not known.
It isn’'t all bad news. There have been some successes. Donald Rumsfeld’'s former biotech company, Gilead Biosciences, make the AIDS cocktail drug atripola, which is now making obscene amounts of money in a plethora of AIDS pogroms (as well as Gilead’'s Tamiflu to fight the global “bird flu pandemic”).
It is also a cheerful news that George Bush’s PEPFAR pogrom was funded by a propagandized and hoodwinked congress, and will now move forward to dump these and other rank poisons on millions of Africans, and other 3rd World nations like India, China, and others. We also have much to be optimistic about because drugs like nevirapine were withdrawn from use in the U.S. a few years ago because of its rank liver-destructive toxicity, especially in women, and are now continuously being dumped on Africans and other of the World’s most vulnerable.
Another piece of good news is that Kevin de Cock who is a World AIDS leader, announced recently that “heterosexual AIDS is over,” except of course, and according to the WHO and to him, among large segments of Africa, and the African American community perhaps, who remain problematic not because of some difference compared to whites in their heterosexual behavior, but simply because they are black. It is my argument that such institutionalized racism, cultural phobia, and targeted selective testing biases have come to define the current “AIDS pandemic.”
It is also hopeful that with the stroke of a pen, Mr. Obama’'s administration could reverse the current carnage that is occurring in the black community in all our major cities, and reduce the AIDS deaths in America to those reported in every other civilized country of the world, simply by changing the diagnostic definition of AIDS as other countries have.
Such a pen stroke could save billions of dollars for our failing petrochemical and pharmaceutical economy that refuses to support the development of renewable energy, while it is being developed in civilized continents like South America and Europe. Such a pen stroke also could at the same time save many of our white 13 year-olds (like Ryan White who died of a liver bleed, and whose misfortune because he was a hemophiliac was exploited with the help of the moralistic Jesse Helms to advance the Ryan White Act during the Reagan administration). With the stroke of a pen, President Obama could even save the occasional “low risk” always faithful to her husband” soccer mom, or boy-scout-leader dad, from the devastation that will occur because of the universal testing proposed by the CDC, the American Society of Pediatrics, the AMA, and other physician organizations to test everybody over the age of 13, everyone who enters an emergency room, the entire African American population of New York City, and of course, every infant born in a hospital. A pen stroke could save thousands of “low risk persons,” who will at low frequency, be convicted of being “HIV-positive” because they had a recent flu or hepatitis B vaccine.
Andrew Maniotis, PhD.
Visiting Associate Professor of Bioengineering,
University of Illinois, Chicago
On the 24th anniversary of the day a human retrovirus was named in a press conference, called by the Centers for Disease Control as "the probable cause of Aids" an international group of scientists says it is time to re-assess that belief.
Being diagnosed HIV-positive is a traumatic experience - emotionally, mentally and physically -HelpForHIV
In the 70s we had Richard Nixon's and Jimmy Carter's War on Cancer, an all-out well financed research program that sought to establish a viral cause and to find a cure for the Big C. Despite much work and huge amounts of money poured into the program, no such virus was found and - famously - no cure either. Much of this research centered on the so-called lentivirus or retrovirus family - a class of virus that turned out to be a harmless byproduct of the human metabolism, rather than a cause of any disease.
As the cancer research program folded for lack of results, a new focus was needed and a new direction of research. The announcement by Robert Gallo that a new virus, later named HIV or human immunodeficiency virus, was implicated in AIDS, gave that new focus and direction. But now, 24 years later, the hypothesis of HIV as "the probable cause of Aids" as Gallo had called it, shows signs of failure.
Not all patients have the virus. As a matter of fact, no clear and clean isolation of the virus was ever published in a scientific journal. The distribution of Aids does not match what one would expect from an infectious disease, no cure has been found and no vaccine is in sight either.
Scientists are defecting from the HIV=AIDS hypothesis, but there is great momentum in the money that funds research. As was the case with cancer, the only cause being looked into is a viral cause, because the only acceptable remedy is pharmaceutical. Other research has been terminated.
The cracks in the viral Aids paradigm are many and re-examination is needed. Here is the announcement of Rethinking Aids...
Rethinking AIDS Day is the 23rd of April. Just one day after Earth Day, celebrated on 22 April to promote the need for reexamining our relationship with the environment, Rethinking AIDS Day prompts us to critically examine the widely held idea that the immune weakness we see in AIDS is caused by an infective virus.
According to HEAL, "Rethinking AIDS Day (RAD) is April 23rd to remember (not celebrate) the anniversary of the infamous Gallo/Heckler news conference announcing the 'probable' cause of AIDS had been discovered. By the time the science was published and found wanting, it was too late."
RethinkingAIDS has a call to action which goes into more detail about that botched announcement of "the cause" of AIDS:
At an international press conference on April 23, 1984, Dr. Robert Gallo, a federally funded cancer researcher, announced that he had discovered "the probable cause of AIDS," a new virus which would later be given the name HIV. The world media accepted the discovery of HIV as the cause of AIDS as a matter of fact although no proof was presented that day or anytime thereafter. Now, twenty four years and $500 billion later, there is still no scientific evidence that Gallo ever isolated HIV from any of the AIDS patients he had studied, and there is still no published paper from any other scientist anywhere in the world demonstrating the direct purification of HIV from any human being.
They also have an evolving page of initiatives: List of Events. Wearing a black ribbon (instead of the red one) is one of the ideas of how you can make that day your own.
Anyone with a computer, an internet connection and some basic skills of finding information can confirm for themselves that the theory that tells us that HIV=AIDS=ILLNESS AND DEATH is full of holes. A number of articles on this site point out such holes, among them:
Seeing a great number of holes in the official theory, the question arises: What really does cause AIDS? Dr Harold Foster answers that question from the viewpoint of epidemiological geology, saying that those with certain mineral deficiencies - especially of selenium - are at risk. The book What Really Causes AIDS? is a free download from his site.
Beldeu Singh, a Malaysian researcher and writer, argues that AIDS is really a consequence of our lifestyle. Nothing to do with a virus, as much as the medical establishment wishes to promote that cause. The dogma that HIV causes Aids which in turn causes death is like the Titanic and it going to sink just like the ship after it hit the iceberg.
The real culprit, says Singh, is our infatuation with drugs, medical and non, but especially those based on the benzene molecule. Our use of chemicals to treat both emotional and physical problems is to blame. Unfortunately, this use of chemicals is sustained and promoted by a multi-billion dollar industry that has the ear of health authorities world wide. In his article, Singh illustrates the mechanism that is behind this common immune weakness.
Audrey Serrano, a woman living in the US and misdiagnosed with HIV was awarded $2.5 million in damages in December last year for the shock and for suffering the adverse effects of the drugs she had to take for years before the mistake was corrected. While that is a welcome break from the Aids propaganda we're subjected to from all sides, it really only reveals the tip of the iceberg of a human disaster of untold dimensions that is going on right before our eyes.
Aids is an epidemic of medical failures if there ever was such a thing.
- The virus that supposedly causes the immune weakness has never been scientifically isolated and no one has explained how it causes such weakness, throwing the whole theory behind HIV and Aids into doubt.
- The test for the virus is notoriously unreliable - some 60 or 70 unrelated conditions are known to cause a false "positive" reading when no trace of the virus can be found.
- A "positive" result for HIV antibodies should really be a cause for celebration. Everyone knows that when we have antibodies there is no longer any need to worry about getting sick. The body has successfully overcome the illness and is now ready to fight any future viral intruders. But no - not so with Aids. Here a positive test result means we are told to undergo treatment.
- Treatment typically consists of a highly toxic cocktail of medicines to be consumed for years to come. Few can actually survive the ravages of the drug side effects, which have become the major cause of death in "Aids".
But there is another dimension to this tragedy which perhaps even overshadows the fate of those coerced or cajoled into submitting to a fraudulent test and a deadly drug regimen.
It is the tragedy of those who simply live in poor conditions, who more often than not are declared victims of Aids without as much as a test. Kaushalya is one of those. Her husband died of tuberculosis, not an uncommon occurrence in Delhi, India. She was labeled - falsely like Audrey Serrano in the US - as HIV infected.
Widowed Kaushalya with her daughter in 1997. Today, the tall, healthy lady is happily married and has given birth to her third daughter
To be sure, Kaushalya didn't win a millionaire's settlement in a legal action, but her story, described by Arun Shrivastava, social activist and environmental campaigner, gives us an insight into that other dimension, where Aids does its damage not by viral action and not even through the agency of a toxic 'medicine'. It tells of the stigma that the great unknown plague brings and of its genocidal consequences in the less developed countries.
David Rasnik recently said, "AIDS has little to do with science and medicine because it is fundamentally a political and sociological phenomenon". Perhaps, after reading Kaushala's story you might concur with David and with Thabo Mbeki, the courageous African politician who dared challenge the scientists to uncover the real damage Aids is doing to the whole African continent.
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.
