(Information shown in red indicates recent additions.)
Part 1
�It�s not even probable, let alone scientifically proven, that HIV causes AIDS. If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There are no such documents.� Spin Magazine, Vol. 10 No.4, 1994
�The HIV-causes-AIDS theory is one hell of a mistake.� Foreword, �Inventing the AIDS Virus�
�Years from now, people will find our acceptance of the HIV theory of AIDS as silly as we find those who excommunicated Galileo.� �Dancing Naked in the Mind Field,� 1998
�Where is the research that says HIV is the cause of AIDS? There are 10,000 people in the world now who specialize in HIV. None has any interest in the possibility HIV doesn�t cause AIDS because if it doesn�t, their expertise is useless.�
�People keep asking me, �You mean you don�t believe that HIV causes AIDS?� And I say, �Whether I believe it or not is irrelevant! I have no scientific evidence for it.� I might believe in God, and He could have told me in a dream that HIV causes AIDS. But I wouldn�t stand up in front of scientists and say, �I believe HIV causes AIDS because God told me.� I�d say, �I have papers here in hand and experiments that have been done that can be demonstrated to others.� It�s not what somebody believes, it�s experimental proof that counts. And those guys don�t have that.� California Monthly, Sept 1994
�If you think a virus is the cause of AIDS, do a control without it. To do a control is the first thing you teach undergraduates. But it hasn�t been done. The epidemiology of AIDS is a pile of anecdotal stories selected to the virus-AIDS hypothesis. People don�t bother to check the details of popular dogma or consensus views.� HIV not Guilty, Oct 5, 1996
�[Aids] is not �God�s wrath� or any other absurdity. A segment of our society was experimenting with their lifestyle, and it didn�t work. They got sick. Another segment of our pluralistic society, call them doctor/scientist refugees from the failed War on Cancer, or just call them professional jackals, discovered that it did work. It worked for them. They are still making payments on their new BMWs out of your pocket.� Dancing Naked in the Mind Field. Vintage Books. 2000 � Dr. Kary Mullis, PhD, Biochemist, Winner, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for inventing the polymerase chain reaction, the basis for the HIV viral load tests.
�The HIV hypothesis of AIDS is the biggest scientific, medical blunder of the 20th Century. The evidence is overwhelming that AIDS is not contagious, sexually transmitted, or caused by HIV. The physicians who know or suspect the truth are embarrassed or afraid to admit that the HIV tests are absurd and should be outlawed, and that the anti-HIV drugs are injuring and killing people.� Mail & Guardian, Johannesburg, SA, Jan 24, 2001
�As a scientist who has studied AIDS for 16 years, I have determined that AIDS has little to do with science and is not even primarily a medical issue. AIDS is a sociological phenomenon held together by fear, creating a kind of medical McCarthyism that has transgressed and collapsed all the rules of science, and has imposed a brew of belief and pseudo-science on a vulnerable public.� Spin, June 1997
�Fifty percent of Africans have no sewage systems. Their drinking water mixes with animal and human waste. They have constant TB and malaria infections, the symptoms of which are diarrhea and weight loss, the very same criteria UNAIDS and the World Health Organization use to diagnose AIDS in Africa. These people need clean drinking water and treated mosquito nets [mosquitoes carry malaria], not condoms and lectures and deadly pharmaceuticals forced on pregnant mothers.� Scheff, AIDS Debate, Boston Dig, 2003
�We�ve put 20 years and $118 billion into HIV. We�ve got no cure, no vaccine and no progress. Instead we have thousands of people made sick and even killed by toxic AIDS drugs. But we can�t just treat them for the diseases we know they have because if we do, we�re called �AIDS denialists.� AIDS is a multi-billion dollar industry. There are 100,000 professional AIDS researchers in this country. It�s as hard to challenge as big tobacco at this point.� Scheff
�Those damn [HIV] tests should be outlawed. They�re lethal. First of all, it�s a death sentence in South Africa. People commit suicide, they�ve been stoned to death, they�ve had their houses burned down, they�ve been murdered. Just for having antibodies to HIV. They have been ostracized. And in certain rural communities, ostracism is equivalent to death. So you�re scared to death, first of all. And then you start taking the anti-HIV drugs, which cause AIDS, and if you take them long enough they will kill you.� New York Press, vol. 14, no. 16, 2002
�In 1990 at the San Francisco AIDS conference, [HIV co-discoverer Luc] Montagnier announced that HIV did not, after all, kill T-cells and could not be the cause of AIDS. Within hours of making this announcement, he was attacked by the very industry he�d helped to create.� Scheff
�People can have a high viral load and be healthy and have a low viral load and be sick and everything in between. These guys [AIDS researchers] will admit this between themselves, they just don�t admit it publicly.� Gear Magazine, March 2000
�The National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, the Medical Research Council, and the World Health Organization are terrorizing hundreds of millions of people around the world by their reckless and absurd policy of equating sex with death. Linking sex to death has put these organizations in an impossible situation. It would be intolerably embarrassing for them to admit at this late date that they are wrong, that AIDS is not sexually transmitted. Such an admission could very well destroy these organizations or at the very least put their future credibility in jeopardy. Self preservation compels these institutions to not only maintain but to actually compound their errors, which adds to the fear, suffering, and misery of the world � the antithesis of their reason for being.� British Medical Journal Rapid Response, 18 April 2003 � Dr. David Rasnick, PhD, Biochemist, Protease Inhibitor Developer, University of California
�The HIV-causes-AIDS dogma is the grandest fraud that has ever been perpetrated on young men and women of the Western world. AIDS is a cruel deception that is maintained because so many people are making money from it. Take away this money and the entire system of mythology will collapse.� Sunday Times, London, 3 April 1994
�I think that Duesberg and Root-Bernstein have it right [about what causes AIDS]. Anything or process that destroys the individual�s ability to mount an immune response�This could be the use of�cocaine, heroin, amyl nitrite (poppers), amphetamines...malnutrition and lack of essential vitamins�being the recipient of whole blood or blood products�repeated and multiple infections� [all] are immunosuppressive.�
�Kimberly Bergalis, according to the general press, was a young lady who was found to have antibody to HIV�she was put on AZT [AIDS medicine]�the AZT killed her.�
�Ryan White was an 18-year-old hemophiliac who died in April of 1990 of unstoppable internal bleeding which may have been exacerbated by the AZT he was taking.�
��Even after many years not one [HIV-infected] chimp has come down with AIDS diseases. This means we have an animal model for HIV, and it does not seem to cause AIDS.�
��By the most sensitive PCR and culture procedures, no virus can be detected in 90% of the semen samples taken from men with AIDS.� Rethinking AIDS May 1993
�The reason that the whole shabby story of HIV is being held in place is there�s so much money riding on it. The federal government is spending about $4 billion on just this single subject, and all that $4 billion is predicated on the idea that HIV causes these diseases. If HIV does not cause these diseases, then that money is being wasted. And I believe it is being wasted. But the people who are the recipients of that money don�t want it to stop.�
�I often wonder what would happen if all federal money for AIDS�education, research, treatment, and so forth�was suddenly dropped to zero. It�s my belief that AIDS would go away. In other words, the AIDS diseases that we see today would be reassigned to their former categories�Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, Kaposi�s sarcoma, and the other 25 or so different diseases, now including cervical dysplasia and so forth. AIDS has been a disease of definition. If we said that it didn�t exist and didn�t pay for it with taxpayers� money, it would disappear into the background of normal mortality.� Penthouse Magazine, April 1995
�Sex is no more dangerous today than 20 years ago�or 1,000 years ago.� Rethinking AIDS May 1993 � Dr. Charles Thomas, PhD, former Professor of Biochemistry, Harvard and Johns Hopkins Universities. Former chair of the Cell Biology Department, Scripps Research Institute
�I do not believe that HIV, in and of itself, can cause AIDS.� New York Daily News Sep 20, 1993
�The assumption was made in 1984 that HIV caused AIDS and this has scarcely been challenged since. We don�t really know if HIV causes AIDS, nor have we seriously tried to find out.� Virusmyth.net, Nov. 1991
�It will surely lead to a scientifically healthier society if the burden of proof for HIV as a deadly pathogen is returned to where it belongs � to those who maintain that HIV causes AIDS � and others are allowed to pursue alternative approaches in the battle for eradication of the disease.� Nature, 20 April 1989 � Dr. Beverly E. Griffin, PhD, Director, Department of Virology, Royal Postgraduate Medical School, London
�HIV tests are meaningless. A person can react positive even though he or she is not infected with HIV. The tests are interpreted differently in different countries, which means that a person who is positive in Africa [or Thailand] can be negative when tested in Australia. There is no justification for the fact that most people have not been informed about the serious inaccuracy of the tests. The error has catastrophic repercussions on thousands of people. Since people are reacting positive on tests that are not specific for HIV, let�s please stop labeling them as �HIV positive.�� Continuum Magazine, Mid-Winter 1999
�There are many scientific facts which show that the so-called human immunodeficiency virus (�HIV�) does not fulfill the epidemiological and biological requirements, nor the common sense requirements, to be the cause of the human immunodeficiency syndrome.� Continuum, Spring 1998
�The transmission of AIDS from person to person is a myth. The homosexual transmission of AIDS in Western countries, as well as the heterosexual transmission of AIDS in Africa and in other underdeveloped countries, is an assumption without any scientific validation.� Virusmyth.net, Sep. 2000
�None of the postulates on which the infectious hypothesis of AIDS is based fulfill the requirements of the research method. None of the bases of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis has been demonstrated at an objective level. They are theoretical assumptions, created by the minds of those who generate and defend that hypothesis.� �Aids and Stressors,� 1997 � Dr. Roberto Giraldo, MD, specialist in internal medicine, infectious and tropical diseases, New York. Former Chairman of the Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia. Author, Aids and Stressors
�I would not be surprised if there were another cause of AIDS and even that HIV is not involved.� Omni Magazine, June 1993
�Duesberg is absolutely correct in saying that no one has proven that AIDS is caused by the AIDS virus. And he is absolutely correct that the virus cultured in the laboratory may not be the cause of AIDS.� Hippocrates Sept./Oct. 1988 � Dr. Walter Gilbert, PhD, Professor of Molecular Biology, Harvard University. Winner, 1980 Nobel Prize for chemistry
�Buried deep within the secretive and well-guarded dogma that Aids is a plague caused by the lethal virus known as HIV, there is a time bomb of potentially explosive contrary information.�
�The hypothesis that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS simply does not fit the clinical and epidemiological facts.� Sunday Times, London, 7 June 1992
�There is no specific etiologic agent of AIDS. The disease arises as a result of a cumulative process following a period of exposure to multiple environmental factors...� �Debating AZT,� 2000
�Nobody wants to look at the facts about this disease. It�s the most extraordinary thing I�ve ever seen. I�ve sent countless letters to medical journals pointing out the epidemiological discrepancies and they simply ignore them. The fact is, this whole heterosexual AIDS thing is a hoax.� Spin June 1992
�AIDS is a behavioural disease. It is multifactorial, brought on by several simultaneous strains on the immune system � drugs, pharmaceutical and recreational, sexually transmitted diseases, multiple viral infections.� Spin June 1992
�With the �discovery� of HIV as the putative, universally infectious retrovirus and the conversion of this hypothesis into a dogma by the consensus, all dissent began to be suppressed by anonymous censorship, which became absolute, amazingly pervasive, and apparently immune from disclosure of conflicts of interests. On many occasions, I have been asked by the BBC and other networks to talk about AIDS only to find, at the last minute, that my appearance was canceled.�
�Colleagues and I attempting to publish have met an unholy alliance intent on rejecting any papers that offer serious criticisms of the orthodoxy. The mainstream journals and media � whenever they are presented with reasonable doubts about Aids � close ranks like regimented clams � There are, naturally, vested interests involved; many bodies and individuals receive high rewards for their work within orthodox AIDS science. Underlying much of this, the pharmaceutical companies have their own obvious agenda.� Index on Censorship, UK, Issue 3, 1999
�It is a scandal that the major medical journals have maintained a conspiracy of silence over any dissent from the orthodox [HIV-AIDS] views and official handouts. At the same time, through their panic statements about everyone being at risk, health authorities spread undue alarm and anxiety among millions.� Sunday Times, London, 7 June 1992
�The germ theory has become a dogma because it neglects the many other factors which have a part to play in deciding whether the host/germ/environment complex is to lead to infection. Among these are susceptibility, genetic constitution, behaviour, and socioeconomic determinants.� �Limitations of the Germ Theory�. Lancet. 1968 May 18 � Dr. Gordon Stewart, MD, Emeritus Professor of Public Health, University of Glasgow. Former Consultant Physician (Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine) to National Health Service (UK) and WHO. Author of over 100 journal articles and contributions to symposia, as well as such books as Trends in Epidemiology and The Penicillin Group of Drugs.
�While the experts, with their statistics, would have one believe that there exists an extremely serious HIV/AIDS epidemic [in Africa], no trace of an epidemic is observable in the field. All that can be seen is a very poor, undernourished population suffering from malaria, endemic immunodeficiency and common illnesses.�
�The facts very clearly demonstrate that the endemic African immunodeficiency has nothing to do with a hypothetical �HIV,� but is, rather, the result of malnutrition and its corollaries.�
�The so-called �HIV� tests are unspecific; the positive results they may give are misleading and lead to the false belief in the existence of a viral epidemic. A positive test � and this applies especially to Africa � is not a sign of a specific viral infection. These so-called �HIV� tests are deceptive, in that the positive results give the illusion that a precise diagnosis has been made.�
�And yet, it is these very same misleading [HIV test] results which constitute the basis of official statistics and which lead, first the experts, then the scientists, medical doctors, newspaper reporters, and finally the general public to believe that Africa is being ravaged by a specific viral infection called �HIV/AIDS!� People speak of an epidemic of �HIV/AIDS,� but the only thing which has the appearance of an epidemic is what I would call the �epidemic of tests,� an artificial epidemic which is being actively promoted.�
�[The HIV tests] are also dangerous because they cause panic and stigmatization, they lead to the use of toxic anti-viral drugs and they draw attention away from the real sources of immune system deficiencies. Common sense and scientific reason dictate their abandonment.�
�For more than 15 years, the various scientific, medical and mass media alike have ceaselessly portrayed Africa as the continent caught in the grip of a new deadly sexually transmitted infection, and doomed to the most somber future imaginable. Yet, during this very same period, the population that was in the eye of the cyclone and received no specific treatment has continued to increase as before.�
�In 1985, the newly out �HIV� tests detected the first HIV-positive individuals in precisely this same [Tanzania] border area�According to the experts, this region was doomed to be decimated, unless energetic measures were taken to combat this new deadly virus.
�Fifteen years later, we can begin to take stock of the situation. The following are official census results: For Tanzania, a regular upward curve can be observed for the period 1967 to 2002, with a [population] growth of 49% between 1988 and 2002. There is no drop in the population. For the Kagera region, we see the same upward curve, with 53% growth between 1988 and 2002.�
���HIV� tests were conducted [in Tanzania], but they led to the observation that sick children, whether �HIV�-positive or �HIV�-negative, recuperated equally well, so long as they received adequate nutrition and medical attention.�
�To state that the priority, with respect to emergency humanitarian aid, should be given to the fight against �HIV� and to giving those countries the possibility of buying cheap-priced anti-viral products is just as irrational as saying to someone suffering from acute vitamin C deficiency, �Sir, I see that you are suffering from scurvy. You�d better go buy yourself some antibiotics and condoms.�� December 8, 2003, address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels � Dr. Marc Deru, MD, Vis�, Belgium
�The gross figures about African AIDS were extrapolated to heavy degrees of exaggeration from small samples, thanks to interested publicists consciously running up the score. At a time (1980-2000) when AIDS was portrayed as decimating Africa, the population was actually increasing from 378 million to 652 million. Remember as well that people don�t die of AIDS per se but of other diseases attacking individuals made vulnerable by immune deficiencies whose principal cause, universally, is not HIV but nothing more mysterious than poor living conditions. The more selective precondition of AIDS can thus be posthumously assigned, presumptively.� AIDS Reconsidered. 2006 Oct. � Richard Kostelanetz, MA. Fulbright Scholar. Prolific writer, musician, videographer and artist.
�There are many people with AIDS but without HIV, and a great many people with HIV but without AIDS. These two facts mean that HIV=AIDS is much too simple. Plausible, alternative, testable causes of impairment of the immune system which may ultimately lead to AIDS should become part of regular AIDS research.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994 � Dr. Henk Loman, PhD, Professor of Biophysical Chemistry at the Free University in Amsterdam.
�I am well convinced HIV is harmless.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994 � Dr. Fabio Franci, MD, Specialist in Preventive Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Trieste, Italy
�I stopped going to AIDS meetings several years ago � I could no longer stand the stress of restraining myself from getting up and shouting, �Rubbish!��
�From the outset I was never convinced that HIV had a role to play in AIDS, since the so-called evidence was unacceptable to me. However, I learned to keep my views to myself for a long time until I realized that there were many other �dissidents� and doubters out there.�
�None of these investigators isolate actual viruses or viral genomes; all they do is add some primers to a PCR mixture and pretend that the printout represents HIV genomes. None of this has been proven, and furthermore the PCR technique was never conceived as a quantitative measure of anything. In view of this we should always qualify our usage of the term �viral load,� otherwise we fall into the trap of subscribing to their hypothetical nonsense.�
�I do not believe there is an AIDS epidemic in Africa or Asia. People there are still dying from the combined effects of chronic infectious diseases plus malnutrition, poverty, and other factors, just as they always have.� Virusmyth.net � Dr. James Hudson, PhD, Professor of Pathology and Medicine, University of British Columbia, Canada
�There are too many shortcomings in the theory that HIV causes all signs of AIDS. We are seeing people HIV-infected for 9, 10, 12 years or more, and they are still in good shape, their immune system is still good. It is unlikely that these people will come down with AIDS later.�
�HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS.� VI Int�l AIDS Conference, Jun 24 1990
�AIDS does not inevitably lead to death, especially if you suppress the co-factors that support the disease. It is very important to tell this to people who are infected.... I think we should put the same weight now on the co-factors as we have on HIV.�
�Psychological factors are critical in supporting immune function. If you suppress this psychological support by telling someone he�s condemned to die, your words alone will have condemned him.�
�We did not purify [isolate] ... We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology [shape] typical of retroviruses ... They were very different ... What we did not have, as I have always recognized it, is that it was truly the cause of AIDS.� Interview with Djamel Tahi-1997 � Dr. Luc Montagnier, Virologist, co-discoverer of HIV, Pasteur Institute, Paris
�[Luc] Montagnier said clearly what he meant. HIV is a necessary but not, without the cofactor, a sufficient cause of AIDS.� Nature 1992, 357:189 � John Maddox, Editor, Nature Magazine
�In 1994, (HIV co-discoverer) Robert Gallo quietly admitted that Kaposi�s Sarcoma (KS) � the major AIDS defining illness in gay men � could not be caused by HIV. But this was never reported in the mainstream press. Gallo told the audience of scientists and activists at the �94 NIDA meeting that HIV couldn�t cause KS and that he�d never even found it in T-cells, which HIV is supposed to kill. He said, �I don�t know if I made this point clear, but I think that everybody here knows � we never found HIV DNA in the tumor cells of KS. And, in fact, we�ve never found HIV DNA in T-cells. So in other words, we�ve never seen the role of HIV as transforming [cancer-causing] in any way.��
�This was in complete opposition to everything Gallo had ever said about HIV or AIDS. But very few people paid attention to his retraction. The CDC ignored it, and continues to tell people KS is an AIDS disease. When Gallo was asked what, if not HIV, caused KS, he said, �The nitrites [poppers] could be the primary factor� because �mutagenesis is the most important thing.� It�s a very embarrassing situation for the AIDS establishment, and they�ve kept it quiet. One of the two hallmark diseases of AIDS is now clearly understood to be totally unrelated to AIDS or HIV.� AIDS Debate, Boston Dig, 2003 � Liam Scheff, Journalist who exposed the forced drugging of orphans at the New York �Incarnation Children�s Center�
�[The evidence is] overwhelming that [Kaposi�s Sarcoma] is not caused by HIV.� Spin, Nov 1994 � Dr. Marcus Conant, Clinical Professor of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco
�It�s clear that HIV alone can�t explain Kaposi�s [sarcoma]. There has to be something else.�
�The KS lesions are most common on the face, nose, and chest. If you are inhaling vapors, that is where you will have the highest concentrations. You don�t have to be a rocket scientist to see that there is some logic to the hypothesis [that gay men�s use of nitrites (�poppers�) caused Kaposi�s Sarcoma]� Spin, Nov 1994 � Dr. Harry Haverkos, Director of the AIDS office, US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
�Evidence is rapidly accumulating that the original theory of HIV is not correct.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994
�When Magic Johnson announced that he was infected by HIV, I wrote him a letter saying that assuming he didn�t have any other disease or condition that compromised his immune system, and assuming he didn�t take AZT, I would wager $10,000 that he would not die of AIDS. I advised Magic to un-retire and go back to playing in the N.B.A. He took that advice, although I�m sure it was not because I sent him a letter. I think it was highly unfortunate that he was forced to retire. I�m sure that there are any number of players in the N.B.A. who are HIV-positive, and none of them will get AIDS either, unless they have some other disease or condition which compromises their immune system.�
�There were people who felt that a single-virus theory would be very useful in helping to raise public awareness about the �disease.� It would help them get the research they thought was necessary and public funding for its treatment by scaring people into believing that while the disease was affecting gay men now, it was eventually going to spread throughout the heterosexual population. This political definition of the disease has proven to be inaccurate and inconsistent with its real medical nature.� Penthouse, April 1995 � Dr. Steven Jonas, MD, Professor of Preventive Medicine, State University of New York at Stony Brook
�AZT (anti-viral AIDS medicine) has, in countless cases, brought about the inevitable and slow asphyxiation of the patient�s body cells, and death by poisoning. The doctors wrongly diagnose the fatal consequences of AZT medication as AIDS following a prior HIV infection. Treatment with AZT and allied toxic substances may be equivalent to joining a suicide squad with a time fuse.� Continuum, July/Aug. 1996 � Dr. Alfred Hassig, MD, Professor in Immunology, University of Bern, former Director Swiss Red Cross blood banks. Advisor to WHO. President, International Society for Blood Transfusion. Chairman, Study Group for Nutrition and Immunity. Pioneer in hematology, immunology and stress-medicine. � Dr. Heinrich Kremer, MD, Germany � Dr. Stefan Lanka, PhD, German virologist
�People with AIDS must learn that much of what they are told about AIDS is mere speculation, i.e. theories. The idea that the virus invades white blood cells, called T4 helper cells, and destroys them is one such theory. This theory and myth has been presented to the public as fact. The idea that a diminished number of T4 cells is the critical factor in the development of AIDS is another such theory. The idea that a number of T4 cells below 200 is the magic measure of whether a person should start taking AZT is a pig-in-the-poke choice of numbers.�
�In my own medical practice I have a few patients who have had less than 50 T4 helper cells for months and years and they haven�t become weakened or ill with serious infections. On the other hand, one patient who followed a natural therapy had a T4 increase from less than 100, to over 600, at which time he developed pneumocystis carinii pneumonia.�
�T4 white blood cell counts are intimately related to mental focus. One of my patients was without symptoms and went to another doctor for an �AIDS test.� The doctor did the test, which was positive, as well as the T4 helper cell count, which was 494 and normal. Upon learning that his antibody test was positive, the patient went into a tailspin of depression and fear. One week later he returned to the doctor because of his anxiety, and his T4 helper cell count was taken again. After one week of depression and no other symptoms, his T4 cells count fell over 50% to 234.�
�This intimate relationship of the mind and body raises a question about the true nature of the AIDS epidemic. It is not far-fetched to postulate that much of the immune system depression among AIDS-test-positive patients might be the result of doctors telling them that it is likely they will get AIDS and die. The brain is a giant immune system gland that operates on hope, joy, and optimism. The gland turns off in response to mental attitudes of fear and depression.
�The question is raised as to how many people are dying because they have been programmed to die. The observation is made that doctors who tell their patients they have a terminal disease are programming their patients to die. The charge is made that these doctors are performing malpractice.� � Dr. Lawrence Badgley, MD, San Francisco. Author, Healing Aids Naturally
�The first casualty of the �war on AIDS� was the integrity of science. The exact moment of the crime can be pinpointed: it was the April, 1984 press conference where the then [US] Health Secretary Margaret Heckler declared that government scientist Robert C. Gallo had discovered the viral cause of AIDS. Heckler hailed the discovery as �yet another miracle for American medicine and science� and a �victory over a dreaded disease.� If smoke and mirror tricks are miracles, then miracle it was...Neither Gallo nor the [Pasteur] Institute proved that the virus was pathogenic. Indeed, they did not even isolate it, as the Pasteur Institute later admitted. But the spin-doctors at the National Institutes of Health had organized leading journals to endorse Secretary Heckler�s �miracle� with the seal of Science. From that moment, all AIDS research and policy were based on a speculation converted to dogma by bureaucratic power.
�This initial public execution of scientific integrity unleashed a propaganda machine that expands Heckler�s initial obvious whopper (�victory over a dreaded disease�) into a never-ending sickness saga that extorts money and grinds millions into the muck of bad medicine.
�Scientific integrity was murdered by a brutal health fascism. The next victim was the gold standard of clinical evaluation, the double blind trial. With a perversity that spin doctors must admire, the methodology was abandoned in the name of ethics! In reality, the double blind trial had to be murdered because it placed the treatment and causality dogmas of AIDS science at grave risk of falsification. The next victim was the integrity of independent clinical judgment. Any doctor who bucked the official line placed himself at risk of retaliation. And now, in the Tyson and Emerson cases, we see that the fundamental right of informed consent and right to refuse treatment were also murdered.�
�Be informed. Withdraw your consent from the most malignant fraud ever perpetrated in the name of medicine. Be aware that the primary truth in the �AIDS war� is that powerful agencies have declared war on YOU and your loved ones, regardless of your HIV status. Be aware that �AIDS science� is 90% mindless repetition and 10% deeply inconsistent findings of no clinical value.� Coming to Grips with Health Fascism, Virusmyth.net, April 1999 � Dr. Hiram Caton, PhD, Ethicist, Head of the School of Applied Ethics at Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
�You do not want to give (AZT) to anyone, but especially to a baby, which is basically a mass of replicating DNA...I have an 8-year-old daughter, and I would never give her AZT - I would leave the state or country first.�
�It's terrible to tell a practicing doctor that his therapy is killing his patients...There�s almost no way to engage orthodox physicians in this debate because they go nuts on you.� The Register-Guard (Eugene, Oregon). 29 Dec 1998
�I don't recommend people ever getting tested. The reason is I don�t know what the tests mean, and I think no one else knows what the tests mean. I�ve never seen any evidence that what these tests purport to show they�re actually showing -- namely, the presence of a virus, the presence of an exogenous virus. I really would like to see the electron microscopic data of this, and apparently there is none. There is none where you�ve done a rigorous isolation protocol.� The Other Side of AIDS https://www.theothersideofaids.com � Robert De Prato, MD, US Dept. of Defense. Portland, Oregon
�When AIDS patients� bodies finally break down from the effects of these anti-viral drugs, they say, �Now the virus has become resistant, and the drugs have lost their effectiveness.� What really is happening is the toxicity of the drugs builds up to a point where the patient cannot stand it anymore. And, of course, they say it was the virus � rather than the entirely inevitable and predictable toxicity of these damned drugs.� Reappraising AIDS Feb./March 1998
�Many Americans use amphetamines, diet drugs, cocaine and designer party drugs. When you do this for years, you start getting sick. You go to the doctor, who says the first thing you need is an HIV test. You test positive because HIV tests cross-react with antibodies produced by drug use. The doctor puts you on AZT, a DNA chain terminator, which, in high doses, will finish you off in six months. I�m not talking about a one-time use of a party drug. We�re designed to consume a lot of junk, but we�re not designed to tolerate a gram of cocaine, nitrite inhalants or heroin per day, and we�re even less capable of handling AZT.� Scheff
�This is my battle with John Maddox [editor of Nature] and with people who are actually fabricating the data [Ascher, et al in Nature, March 11, 1993]. They claim to have such a [Aids] group that had not used any drugs. When I analysed the data, it turned out that there was not a single person in their paper that was drug-free. I submitted a critique to Maddox, but his response was, I could no longer respond. I was censored.� Spin, Sep 1993
�Look, the same virus wouldn�t cause Kaposi�s sarcoma in homosexuals, pneumonia in transplant recipients and �slim disease� in Africa. The HIV theory doesn�t make sense. But we have a totally totalitarian science environment today. You have to become a government contractor to do research. And if you don�t concur with the government � with HIV, with Gallo � you don�t get any money. The fringes are growing, but the majority of researchers are conformists. We have a million PhD�s in this country, and they can�t all be Einsteins. Most of them are just good soldiers; they�ll do as they�re told.� GQ Nov 1993
[On the AIDS establishment�s rejection of HIV co-discoverer Dr. Luc Montagnier when he said in 1990 that HIV alone cannot be the cause of AIDS]: �There was Montagnier, the Jesus of HIV, and they threw him out of the temple.� Miami Herald 23 Dec 1990
�HIV is just a latent, and perfectly harmless, retrovirus that most but not all AIDS patients happen to carry. To say that HIV is the cause of AIDS is to cast aside everything we know about retroviruses...The HIV theory is inconsistent, paradoxical, and absurd...�
�The NIH is saying only experts understand AIDS. And who are they? They�re the people who have worked on HIV, whose careers are completely based on HIV, and worse than that, almost all of them have huge commercial interests associated with it. They have companies; they have patents; they make megabucks. It�s much more profitable than their university research. So, those are the judges. These people can afford to send you to Jupiter. But they cannot afford to give $50,000 to Peter Duesberg or somebody else with an alternative hypothesis, like the one to test for drugs as a cause of AIDS. To prove them wrong would mean that they would risk losing their good reputation and their standing in the scientific community as well as their companies.� Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, June 2000
�Millions of lives that could have been saved won�t be saved if we work on an ungrounded or poorly grounded hypothesis.� Meditel 1990
��The point that everybody is missing is that all those original papers Gallo wrote on HIV have been found fraudulent. Well, then, that throws into question the entire HIV hypothesis, doesn�t it? The HIV hypothesis was based on those papers.� Spin June 1992 � Dr. Peter Duesberg, PhD, Professor of Molecular Biology, University of California, member, National Academy of Sciences, first to map the genetic structure of retroviruses. Five-time recipient of the National Institutes of Health�s Outstanding Investigator Grant. (All federal grants terminated when he started challenging the HIV theory). Author, Inventing the AIDS Virus
�Peter Duesberg knows more about retroviruses than any man alive.� Spin, June 1992
��He doesn�t believe HIV causes the disease�I can�t win that debate. Rational people learn not to debate such things.� NYU Medical Center, Interview with Robert Gallo by James M. Scutero Nov 11, 1993
�I think that if HIV is not being expressed and not reforming virus and replicating, the virus is a dud and won�t be causing the disease...� Spin, Oct 1994 � Dr. Robert Gallo, co-discoverer of HIV
�If the papers that Duesberg cites are not misrepresented � and it is difficult to see how hundreds of papers could be misrepresented without the AIDS establishment coming down mercilessly on his misrepresentations � then his points are indeed compelling. For example: Why is the amount of HIV present in most AIDS patients so small that PCR amplification is required to demonstrate its presence? Why is AIDS in the US and Europe not random as it is in other viral epidemics? Why would HIV take 10 � 15 years from infection to AIDS? Why is the mortality of HIV-antibody positives treated with anti-HIV drugs higher than the untreated group? These and other troubling questions are answered with impeccable logic and references. Of course, the literature could have been abused to make a point, and I�m impressed that the full text of most of the papers cited in Duesberg�s 1992 review are now available though a hyperlink (https://www.rethinkaids.info/body.cfm?id=58). Anyone interested can make judgment.
One could only hope for a detailed point-by-point response from the establishment, but very little of substance has been forthcoming. Mainly, what have come from the AIDS establishment are ex-cathedra responses such as "the evidence is overwhelming." The book reminds us that although over $100 billion has been spent on AIDS research, not a single AIDS patient has been cured � a colossal failure with tragic consequences. It explains in too-clear terms the reasons why AIDS research focuses so single-mindedly on this lone hypothesis to the exclusion of all others: egos, prestige, and money. Mainstream virologists have assumed the power of the purse, and their self-interests (sometimes financial), propel them to suppress challenges. This is not an unusual story: challenges to mainstream views are consistently suppressed by mainstream scientists who have a stake in maintaining the status quo. It's not just Semmelweis and Galileo, but is happening broadly in today's scientific arena. Only now are the granting agencies beginning to face up to this serious problem.� Review of Oncogenes, Aneuploidy, and AIDS: A Scientific Life and Times of Peter Duesberg by Harvey Bialy https://www.deanesmay.com/posts/1136852361.shtml � Gerald H. Pollack, PhD. Professor of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle. Author: Cells, Gels and the Engines of Life and Muscles and Molecules: Uncovering the Principles of Biological Motion
�For the past 20 plus years, like most other hospital based physicians working inside mainstream medicine, I accepted the HIV/AIDS hypothesis without question. The idea that HIV infected and killed T cells and therefore wiped out the immune system causing opportunistic infection was accepted by every one else, so I had no reason to question it. My major concern was avoiding a needle puncture from a patient whose HIV status was unknown. In retrospect, I admit I was vaguely aware of questions, but I didn�t know what those questions were or who posed them.�
�A few months ago, while surfing the internet for news, I came across a Google video entitled,� HIV/AIDS, Fact or Fraud?�, containing interviews with Dr. Peter Duesberg and Dr. Charles Thomas. The information seemed credible and sparked my curiosity, so I ordered the book, �Inventing the Aids Virus� by Peter Duesberg, as well as books by Farber, Bialy and Lauritson, and emailed Dr. Duesberg for more information. He quickly replied with a collection of more recent articles along with a sample of his appealing sense of humor. After weighing the arguments and style of the proponents of the two sides, I came away impressed with what seemed the higher moral and ethical standards of the AIDS rethinkers; their obviously much higher, scientific standards, and their inescapable, common sense credibility.�
�I have previously discussed Figure 3 of Rodriguez et al. (JAMA, Sept. 27, 2006), which shows an extremely poor, bordering on zero, correlation between CD4 cell numbers and HIV viral load. Today, I take a closer look at Figure 2 of the same article, which is reproduced below.
�There are 5 bar graphs showing median CD4 cell loss per year for each of 5 HIV viral load subgroups. Each chart shows a Gaussian distribution of the data. I have rearranged the parts of the figure to make it obvious that the location of the center bar for each of the five Gaussian distribution charts fall on a very straight line that screams: HIV is not the cause AIDS.
�The caption below the figure reads: ��to emphasize the slight increase in CD4 cell decline with increasing plasma HIV RNA levels�.
�The caption is misleading. There is no slight increase in CD4 decline. There is only a very negligible or no increase with increasing HIV load.
�If one wanted to present results showing that increasing HIV viral load numbers do not lead to the loss of CD4 cells (sometimes called AIDS), I cannot think of a better visual demonstration.
�W. Keith Henry MD in a JAMA editorial on p.1523 of the same issue writes: �These findings provide support to those who favor non-virological mechanisms as predominant causes of CD4 cell loss.�
�He also writes: �The seemingly useful practice of combining CD4 cell count and plasma HIV RNA levels to assess individual prognosis or response to HAART needs to be re-examined�...�[the] sustainability of the current paradigm (anti-retroviral combo drugs) is at best questionable.�
�After 20+ years of HIV/AIDS research, JAMA finally agrees with Peter Duesberg.� Barnesworld Blog https://barnesworld.blogs.com/ � Dr. Jeffrey Dach, MD, Medical Director of TrueMedMD. Board certified in interventional radiology and a member of the Board of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine. He retired from radiology in 2004, and is currently in private practice focusing on bio-identical hormone treatment.
�The case for a link between HIV and AIDS is not proven. I would like the �orthodox� scientists to acknowledge that in Africa there are 29 or 30 diseases which may mimic AIDS, which are related to poverty. But they will not accept that because poverty does not make them big money but HIV makes them money. I would like them to acknowledge that most Africans who are said to be positive, if they were to move from Africa to Europe, to America or Australia, most of them, probably 80% would be negative�If we dissidents had only one hundredth of the funds that the orthodox view has, the orthodox view would probably be dead in less than a year.� New African May, July-Aug. 2000
�I find it astonishing that with HIV/Aids you�re not allowed to ask questions, and the so-called dissident group is not allowed any publicity at all. I�m really concerned about the lack of democratic tendencies in the science establishments in South Africa.� ANC Daily News Briefing, 22 March 2000
�Nutritional AIDS dominates the scene in South Africa today as indeed it did during Apartheid. In the middle [19]50�s and 60�s, 50 percent of black children were dead before the age of five. The causes of death were recorded as: Pneumonia, High Fever, Dehydration and intractable Diarrhea due to protein deficiency. Today, these clinical features are called AIDS. Today in South Africa, TB is the leading cause of death and morbidity amongst Africans, but this is called AIDS.� December 8, 2003, address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels � Dr. Sam Mhlongo, MD, Head of the Department of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care at the Medical University of South Africa, Johannesburg.
�I was in Malawi and met with a group of women living with HIV. As I always do when I meet people with HIV/AIDS and other community groups, I asked them what their highest priority was. Their answer was clear and unanimous: food. Not care, not drugs for treatment, not relief from stigma, but food.� �The first line of defence� in �World Food Program: Why food and nutrition matter in the fight against HIV/AIDS�. United Nations. � Peter Piot, UNAIDS Executive Director
�The causal role of HIV in AIDS is certainly not proven.� �Debating AZT,� 2000
�In 1988 the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR) convened a meeting in Washington, DC, which had the obvious purpose of silencing Peter Duesberg. A lot of questions occurred that I thought needed discussion. When I raised those questions at the meeting, I got the response you might expect from a bunch of fundamentalists confronted with someone who questioned the virgin birth. For example, Anthony Fauci [Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases] interrupted me at one point, in a rage, saying how could anyone doubt the compelling role of HIV, when there was this HIV-infected baby, who had never been exposed to other viruses, bacteria or drugs, and developed AIDS. Well, I had no answer. If I did, I couldn�t get up, he was so mad. Well, I later learned that the mother of that baby was an intravenous drug user who had all sorts of health and nutritional problems.�
�One of the things I want to point out is the tricky business of naming a virus. Naming something HIV, Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Avian Leukosis Virus, Avian Myelocytosis Virus � all of those names fix in the minds of those who use them, or work with them, that this is the proof.�
��So I realized then I was dealing with a self-fulfilling prophecy. If there are HIV antibodies when you have Kaposi�s, then it�s AIDS, and if no antibodies�then it�s not AIDS, just Kaposi�s. No wonder there�s such a strong association between the virus and AIDS, if the diagnosis is based on the presence of the virus...� Yale Scientific Vol. 68, 1994
�Who were these people who are so much wiser, so much smarter than Luc Montagnier? He became an outlaw as soon as he started saying that HIV might not be the only cause of AIDS.�
�The minute someone suggests that the orthodoxy might be wrong, the establishment starts to call him crazy or a quack. One week you�re a great scientist; the next week, you�re a jerk. Science has become the new church of America and is closing off all room for creative, productive dissent.� Miami Herald, Dec 23, 1990 � Dr. Harry Rubin, DVM, Professor of Molecular Biology, University of California, Berkeley
�AIDS is a government-defined disease. The CDC and government-funded investigators accept as fact the supposition that �HIV causes AIDS and is sexually transmitted.� This is not to be questioned. But this HIV-AIDS model does not jibe with the true facts of the matter. Only 1 in 1000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits HIV, and only 1 in 275 US citizens has antibodies to this virus. Consequently, the average uninfected person would need to have 275,000 random unprotected sexual contacts to acquire sexually transmitted HIV.�
�Another fact: According to this model, HIV triggers immunodeficiency�by getting into and killing T cells. T cells in the laboratory that are infected with HIV, however, don�t die. Laboratories grow HIV-infected T cells in test tubes, where they thrive, to produce the large quantities of the virus, which is used to detect antibodies to HIV in a person�s blood. This virus infects only 1 in every 500 T cells and is extremely hard to find in a person�s body. What one sees are the antibodies to the virus in the blood.�
�The HIV-AIDS model is untenable. The twenty-plus diseases the government defines as �AIDS� (when antibodies to HIV are also present) are caused, instead, by immunosuppressive heavy-duty recreational drug use, antiretroviral drugs, and receptive anal intercourse. The elusive HIV, when present, simply goes along for the ride, lodged in a small minority of the body�s T cells. It is a passenger on the AIDS airplane, not its pilot.� Letter to Virusmyth.net
�in 1987 Duesberg ran afoul of the establishment. He published a paper in Cancer Research titled "Retroviruses as Carcinogens and Pathogens: Expectations and Reality," followed a year later by one in Science, "HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS." Thereafter, Duesberg was subjected to the punishment now accorded modern-day heretics. The NIH ceased giving him grants (the NIH and other federal and state funding sources have rejected his last 21 consecutive research grant applications), colleagues labeled him "irresponsible and pernicious" (David Baltimore) and his work "absolute and total nonsense" (Robert Gallo), and graduate students at Berkeley were advised not to study with Duesberg if they wanted to go on and have a successful career in biology. He was branded a "rebel," a "maverick," an "iconoclast," and by one writer, in an article in Science in 1988 titled "A Rebel Without a Cause of AIDS," a "gadfly." Blocked from receiving grants, he obtained private funds to maintain his laboratory at UC Berkeley, and he now spends part of each year doing research in Germany. His principle work on HIV/AIDS is �Inventing the AIDS Virus�, published in 1996. In this book, and in other papers he has written on the subject, Duesberg systematically dismantles, piece by piece, the germ theory of AIDS. This theory/hypothesis has two parts: 1) HIV causes AIDS, and 2) HIV is sexually transmitted.
�When Duesberg�s work on HIV/AIDS and cancer is finally recognized and accepted, it will cause a revolution in science. Over the last 50 years government-sponsored and industry-sponsored research programs have come to dominate scientific research. A totalitarian system now exists where only scientists that adhere to the prevailing orthodoxy can receive funds to conduct research. Not only will the government not fund studies on alternative hypotheses for AIDS and cancer, but this stricture applies to other areas of inquiry.� A Modern-Day Copernicus: Peter H. Duesberg https://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller18.html � Dr. Donald W. Miller Jr., MD (Harvard, 1965), BMS (Dartmouth, 1963), Professor of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine. Author of The Practice of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery (1977), co-author of Atlas of Cardiac Surgery(1983, Japanese version 1985), author of Heart in Hand (1999).
�HIV does not cause AIDS. There is no scientific evidence that HIV can kill infected T4 cells. The true problem is that the leaders of the HIV hypothesis have been ignoring important medical facts and are blindly attributing AIDS to the HIV virus. It is very sad and frustrating to know that the AIDS establishment are giving highly toxic drugs such as AZT to pregnant women even with studies that show the depression in the immune system can be reversed by nutrition. Prescribing anti-viral drugs to AIDS patients is like putting gasoline on a fire.� Virusmyth.net, 2 May 2001
��the results of the studies described above clearly show that the reductions in CD4+ T cell counts in homosexual patients have resulted from their treatment with glucocorticoid and not as the result of their HIV-infection. These studies provided clinical proof that HIV is a harmless virus and the HIV tests are worthless.� BMJ RR, 5 February 2004 � Dr. Mohammad Ali Al-Bayati, PhD, Toxicologist and Pathologist, California. Author, Get all the facts: HIV does not cause AIDS.
�Dr. Al-Bayati convincingly demonstrates that the convergence of several factors other than HIV represent the true causes of AIDS.� Virusmyth.net, 2 May 2001
�The HIV hypothesis, a staunchly defended thesis among its proponents, assumes that AIDS is caused by an infectious retrovirus. The declaration that the chosen virus was indeed the cause of AIDS was accompanied by the naming of this virus as the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). Given this name, the HIV hypothesis suddenly became a self-fulfilling proposition and a classical example of the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.� Foreword, �Get all the facts: HIV does not cause AIDS,� June 1999 � Dr. Otto Raabe, PhD, Professor and Director, Institute of Toxicology and Environmental Health, University of California, Davis
�Dr. Al-Bayati provides solid scientific support for the position that HIV does not cause AIDS. Exposure to steroids and the chemicals in our environment, the drugs used to treat AIDS, stress and poor nutrition are the real causes.� Mercola.com newsletter, July 11, 2001 Issue 236
�The truth is that AZT, ddI, ddC, protease inhibitors and other drugs termed �antiretrovirals� have not been found in any controlled studies to show proven clinical benefits for HIV/AIDS patients. The only studies published that claim positive outcome were short-term and did not have statistically significant results.�
�Even more alarming, there is plenty of evidence that these drugs have been found to cause the very symptoms they are meant to cure. Over 500 MDs and/or PhDs have signed a statement calling for a reappraisal of the causes of AIDS, and questioning whether the symptoms are being caused by HIV.�
�What is not mentioned in any textbook is that AZT has been found in five studies performed after its rushed FDA approval to be equally toxic to T-cells, the very cells whose absence is blamed on HIV. This is not surprising since T-cells are produced in the bone marrow, and all the other cells produced there are depleted by AZT. These studies are but a sample of the evidence that suggest that AZT and other �antiretrovirals��are causing a variety of AIDS-like symptoms which are being blamed on HIV.�
�Another fact that raises serious questions about the possibility of HIV causing disease is that even after some $45 billion dollars of research funds, scientists cannot figure out how it supposedly destroys T-cells. This is because it does not destroy T-cells in test tubes and has never been shown to destroy them in humans, either.�
�An immunologist from Harvard Medical School summed up the problem as follows: �We are still very confused about the mechanisms that lead to T-cell depletion, but at least now we are confused at a higher level of understanding.� A simpler explanation of these problems, especially after $45 billion, is that HIV does not affect T-cells, at all.� Mercola.com, 1999 � Dr. Joseph Mercola, former Chairman of the Family Medicine department at St. Alexius Medical Center, Hoffman Estates, Illinois; served as editor of HIV Monograph by Abbott Laboratories published in 1989 and distributed to physicians nationally. Editor of www.mercola.com, one of the top 10 health websites on the internet
�Large numbers of people are being inappropriately treated with [AIDS] drugs they don�t need. And their lives are probably being shortened.�
�It [Dr. David Ho�s �Hit Hard, Hit Early� theory of HIV treatment�which earned him Time Magazine�s �Man of the Year� award] was just unadulterated hype. It was preposterous. It was almost like an instantaneous religion, or a cult, right after Vancouver [AIDS conference]. You were either a part of that hit-hard-hit-early religion or you were not. It split the HIV community.�
�People don�t realize all the myriad ways that doctors benefit from the drug companies. For example, let�s say that drug company A likes the message that Dr. C is talking about, they can give a research grant to Dr. C and because it�s listed as a �research grant,� people will say, �Oh well, this is above board,� when in fact it�s nothing more than a glorified under-the-table payment. Now, let�s say that you are Dr. C, and you have a $250,000 research grant from company A. What is the likelihood that you are going to say anything bad about their drugs? Zero. At best you are going to say nothing.�
�Just go to the U.S. Public Health Service web site. Under federal law they have to disclose who they have taken money from. It�s right there. Some of these doctors have taken money from 15 to 20 different companies. If 20 companies that are in the business of making money for drug treatment are giving you money, can you honestly stand up and say, �Don�t treat?�� Gear Magazine March 2000 � Dr. Stephen Miles, AIDS specialist, University of California Medical Center, Los Angeles
�The marketing of HIV as a killer virus causing AIDS without the need for any other factors has so distorted research and treatment that it may have caused thousands of people to suffer and die.� Sunday Times (London) 17 May 1992
�Gallo was certainly committing open and blatant scientific fraud. But the point is not to focus on Gallo. It�s us � all of us in the scientific community, we let him get away with it�nobody would say a word against Gallo. It had a lot to do with patriotism � the idea that this great discovery was made by an American.�
�The AIDS Medical Foundation was sending out this press release saying that nobody is safe, everybody is going to get it � and all that. When I heard this, I totally freaked out. It was all just nonsense. I called them up and said, �Do you know what�s going to happen as a result of what you are doing? You�re going to freak out heterosexual men, you�re going to destroy relationships, marriages�you�re going to promote violence against gay men�All of which has come true.�
�I couldn�t fight Terry [AmFAR�s then public relations director] He was very determined�He knew that this heterosexual AIDS thing was a hoax, but he said have to do it to raise money. And certainly, you could argue that unless those heterosexual male politicians in Washington thought that sex could kill, they weren�t going to release any money�The money was raised to protect heterosexual men from a disease they�re not going to get anyway. So what have these hundreds of millions of research dollars given us? Nothing. AIDS education? All I see is terror and confusion. And AZT, which is a disaster.� Spin June 1992
�Of course it�s wrong [Dr. David Ho�s math for his proposed �eradication� of HIV]. Everybody knows that. It�s such way-out bullshit. The notion of �eradication� is just total science fiction. Every retrovirologist knows this. The RNA of retroviruses turns into DNA and becomes part of us. It�s part of our being. You can�t ever get rid of it.�
�Yes, [Dr. David Ho] is a fraud, if a fraud means mediocre interpretations of the dynamics of T-cell changes in response to therapy. But, then, who is the fraud? Anybody is capable of having stupid ideas, but what�s unusual is getting them onto the front page of the New York Times and Time. The real villains are the journalists, in my opinion. We have traditionally depended on the press to protect us from nonsense like this � not anymore.� Gear, March 2000
�I�m totally ashamed of the profession. We have all these potent drugs but we don�t know how to use them. If we were a sane society, we would find out. This is not evidence-based medicine. This is just a disgusting manipulation of people�s fears and desperation, all for the sake of selling drugs.� Spin, April, 1997
�We live in a media age that loves sound bites and simple quotes. HIV is simple, whereas the multifactorial model [of AIDS] is very complex. People don�t want to take the time to understand.� Spin, April 1991 � Dr. Joseph Sonnabend, MD, New York Physician, founder of the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR)
�I received my PhD in 2002 for my work constructing mathematical models of HIV infection, a field of study I entered in 1996.�
�My work as a mathematical biologist has been built in large part on the paradigm that HIV causes AIDS, and I have since come to realize that there is good evidence that the entire basis for this theory is wrong. AIDS, it seems, is not a disease so much as a sociopolitical construct that few people understand and even fewer question...�
�Why have we as a society been so quick to accept a theory for which so little solid evidence exists? Why do we take proclamations by government institutions like the NIH and the CDC, via newscasters and talk show hosts, entirely on faith? The average citizen has no idea how weak the connection really is between HIV and AIDS, and this is the manner in which scientifically insupportable phrases like �the AIDS virus� or �an AIDS test� have become part of the common vernacular despite no evidence for their accuracy.�
�Over the past ten years, my attitude toward HIV and AIDS has undergone a dramatic shift. This shift was catalyzed by the work I did as a graduate student, analyzing mathematical models of HIV and the immune system. As a mathematician, I found virtually every model I studied to be unrealistic. The biological assumptions on which the models were based varied from author to author, and this made no sense to me...�
�Enough is enough, and I can no longer in any capacity continue to support the paradigm on which my entire career has been built.�
��But few people know that the criteria for a positive WB [Western Blot HIV test] vary from country to country and even from lab to lab. Put bluntly, a person�s HIV status could well change depending on the testing venue. It is also possible to test �WB indeterminate,� which translates to any one of �uninfected,� �possibly infected,� or even, absurdly, �partly infected� under the current interpretation. This conundrum is confounded by the fact that the proteins comprising the different reactive �bands� on the WB test are all claimed to be specific to HIV, raising the question of how a truly uninfected individual could possess antibodies to even one �HIV-specific� protein.�
�I have come to sincerely believe that these HIV tests do immeasurably more harm than good, due to their astounding lack of specificity and standardization...I cannot buy the idea that any individual needs to have a diagnostic HIV test. A negative test may not be accurate (whatever that means), but a positive one can create utter havoc and destruction in a person�s life � all for a virus that most likely does absolutely nothing. I do not feel it is going too far to say that these tests ought to be banned for diagnostic purposes.�
�The real victims in this mess are those whose lives are turned upside-down by the stigma of an HIV diagnosis�People have lost their jobs, been denied entry into the Armed Forces, been refused residency in and even entry into some countries, even been charged with assault or murder for having consensual sex; babies have been taken from their mothers and had toxic medications forced down their throats. There is no precedent for this type of behavior, as it is all in the name of a completely unproven, fundamentally flawed hypothesis, on the basis of highly suspect, indirect tests for supposed infection with an allegedly deadly virus � a virus that has never been observed to do much of anything.�
�Suffice it to say that the HIV hypothesis of AIDS has offered nothing but predictions � of its spread, of the availability of a vaccine, of a forthcoming animal model, and so on � that have not materialized, and it has not saved a single life.�
�After ten years involved in the academic side of HIV research, as well as in the academic world at large, I truly believe that the blame for the universal, unconditional, faith-based acceptance of such a flawed theory falls squarely on the shoulders of those among us who have actively endorsed a completely unproven hypothesis in the interests of furthering our careers��
�For over twenty years, the general public has been greatly misled and ill-informed. As someone who has been raised by parents who taught me from a young age never to believe anything just because �everyone else accepts it to be true,� I can no longer just sit by and do nothing, thereby contributing to this craziness. And the craziness has gone on long enough. As humans � as honest academics and scientists � the only thing we can do is allow the truth to come to light.� Why I Quit HIV https://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/culshaw1.html � Rebecca Veronica Culshaw, PhD. Assistant Professor of Mathematics, University of Texas at Tyler. Advisor, Journal of Biological Systems. Studied and published mathematical models of HIV infection for 10 years.
�Every mathematician knows that by changing the definition of something, you can change the entire truth about that thing. Rebecca Culshaw describes how the HIV = AIDS �orthodoxists� have abused this idea. As in a shell game, they keep moving the definitions around, so that anything can be true and everyone will be confused. The abuse of science that has been documented here is itself very frightening. But when we learn that the standard treatment for HIV-positives � antiviral therapy � will substantially increase their risk of dying, it�s even scarier.� Editorial review at Amazon.com https://www.amazon.com/Science-Sold-Out-Really-Cause/dp/1556436424/sr=11-1/qid=1167496016/ref=sr_11_1/002-5936051-6572869 � Dan Fendel, B.A. (summa cum laude) Harvard University, PhD, Yale; Professor of Mathematics, San Francisco State University; Primary author, Foundations of Higher Mathematics: Exploration and Proof.
�No evidence of female prostitutes transmitting HIV or AIDS into the heterosexual community exists for any Western nation. Acquisition of HIV by men from female prostitutes is almost always 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.�
�The almost complete absence of HIV among non-drug using prostitutes is not due to safer sex practices. The same studies that found an absence of HIV documented low rates of condom use and very high rates of infection with classical sexually transmitted diseases.�
��Thus, healthy individuals do not contract HIV or AIDS, and even HIV seropositive, drug-abusing female prostitutes have not been and cannot be vectors for transmitting HIV or AIDS to a healthy, drug-free heterosexual population.� Rethinking AIDS March 1993
�Consider, for example, the immunologic risks of blood transfusion patients. It is often said that their only risk of AIDS is HIV. But they would not need a blood transfusion unless they were already at death�s door. The blood that they receive itself suppresses their immune systems; the greater the amount of blood transfused, the greater the immunosuppression.�
�Drug addicts have many more immunologic risks than simply HIV acquired from shared needles. The drugs they use often suppress the immune system. Most addicts are concurrently infected with a variety of viruses, including hepatitis viruses; bacteria; and recurrent sexually transmitted diseases. The majority chronically abuse antibiotics and are therefore much more likely�to acquire drug resistant strains of infections, such as tuberculosis. Most have autoimmune conditions in which their antibodies target their white blood cells. Most are malnourished, some severely so, and do not have the nutrients required to mount an effective immune response... AIDS, in short, is more than just HIV.� Wall Street Journal 17 March 1993
�Every AIDS patient has multiple causes of immune suppression other than HIV, many of which precede HIV infection and some of which occur in the total absence of HIV. The existence of these largely unrecognized immunosuppressive agents in AIDS not only requires a rethinking of the definition of the syndrome as occurring mainly in people without previously identified causes of immune suppression but also necessitates a critical look at the role of HIV as a causative agent in AIDS.� The Evolving Definition Of Aids, Rethinking AIDS
�What, then, is the role of HIV? The only way to explain these [HIV-free AIDS] cases is that the people have other high-risk factors associated with AIDS, such as malnutrition, multiple infections, exposure to symptoms, and drug use�[These factors can] cause the same immune suppression�that everyone says HIV causes.�
�Those people who have had the HIV infection for ten or 15 years now or who have survived full-blown AIDS for five or ten years have not used AZT for more than a week or two because they found the side effects to be so bad. Most of them never used any of these drugs at all. This suggests that survivors don�t use anything that can cause immune suppression. They eliminate drugs, including antibiotics and AZT, and simply try to lead a healthy lifestyle. So they may have the HIV infection, but it doesn�t do anything to them.� Penthouse April 1994
��We thought we knew that HIV always precedes immune suppression in people who develop AIDS. But many studies show that lymphocyte counts are as low in some HIV-negative gay men, intravenous drug users, and hemophiliacs as they are in non-symptomatic HIV-positive people�and sometimes lower.� The Scientist 4 April 1994 � Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein, PhD, Immunologist, Professor of Physiology, Michigan State University
�We do not know the pathogenesis of this disease. And we were very early forced into a very dogmatic view: namely, that somehow HIV kills the T-cells.� Spin April 1991
�I was very upset�The cause of AIDS was discovered by government fiat...I had been working with the Pasteur Institute for six months, but then that [Gallo] announcement was made at the press conference. As far as I�m concerned, from that point on AIDS research turned into seedy, criminal politics, and it remained that way.� Spin, June, 1992
�I was far from convinced by the data they had then and I�m still not convinced. We were all forced into a very dogmatic and simplistic view of what caused AIDS. Today, I think even the greatest proponents of HIV no longer believe that it does all that damage to the immune system by itself. There have to be other factors involved. And because of the HIV hypothesis, there�s been little or no research done on what those other factors may be.� Spin June 1992
�I personally do not prescribe AZT unless a patient insists. I have continued to find that patients survive longer without it.� Spin, April 1991 � Dr. Michael Lange, MD, Head of AIDS Programme, St. Lukes Hospital, New York
�... I was going through an old copy of �Nature� and found a challenge to the Fauci �massive infection� of lymph nodes paper, the one usually cited by the more sophisticated scientists as �proving� HIV causes AIDS. Three Berkeley scientists (Sheppard, Ascher, Krowka; Nature 364:291 22 July 93) politely demolish the claims of the article.
�My favorite sentence in Fauci's response was:
�[T]he persistence of a replicating virus could trigger a complex series of immunopathogenic events even involving uninfected cells, which could account for the progressive deterioration of the immune system.�
�One might add that this theory is now so flexible that it can explain anything.�
�I think, at bottom, the HIV hypothesis is *A BORING FAILURE* and we need something better.� Rethinking Aids, 28 Feb 1994 � Scott R. King, MA, Chemistry, Harvard University. Phi Beta Kappa, University of Chicago, 1977. Awarded National Science Foundation Fellowship, 1977. President and Director, Hanuman Medical LLC, PlasmaSeal LLC, and Cerco Medical LLC. San Francisco, California
�I have a large population of [HIV + patients] who have chosen not to take any anti-retroviral [drugs]. They�ve watched all of their friends go on the anti-viral bandwagon and die.� �Lecture to Medical Students,� Synapse, 1996
�I have been one of the people who�s questioned, from the beginning, whether or not we�re really making an impact with HIV drugs and, if we are making an impact, if it�s going in the right direction.� Continuum, Nov/Dec 1996 � Dr. Donald Abrams, MD, Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco; Director of AIDS Program, San Francisco General Hospital
�HIV does not kill cells in culture, it transmits sexually and parenterally only with great difficulty, it is present only in trace concentrations in the average AIDS patient. Furthermore, AIDS occurs even in HIV-negative individuals. The eradication of HIV by antiviral medication fails to alter the ultimate progression of the syndrome. For these and other reasons, many scientists now doubt the HIV theory and propose instead a non-contagious, multifactorial causation similar to that seen in cancer and heart disease.�
�Although the majority of hemophiliacs have been exposed to HIV through the use of blood products, only 67 out of about 17,000 hemophiliacs have ever developed AIDS. This is not a statistic that compels one to conclude that HIV is a major etiological factor in this syndrome. Also, among treated hemophiliacs, the degree of immune system abnormalities remains the same regardless of whether they are seropositive or seronegative for HIV.� Medical Hypotheses, 1998, 50, 67-80
�When a whole classroom is exposed to streptococcus, why is it that only some children develop strep throat? If a hundred people are infected with hepatitis C virus, why is it that only a fraction of them actually develop a disease from it? The answer clearly lies in the function of the host�s response. Would it not be more rational to suggest that strep throat and hepatitis C are not caused by their associated microbes, but rather by a deficient host response?�
�AIDS is a similar phenomenon. While it seems highly likely that HIV is a significant factor in the disease, the aquisition and course of the disease is much more a function of the host�s immune function than it is of HIV. Thus a cure is impossible when therapy simply focuses on killing HIV, because such an approach fails to address the real reason for the disease, which is a constellation of factors resulting in immune system dysfunction. Indeed, many anti-HIV therapies used today are actually known to further impair immune system function, and theoretically destroy all chances of a cure. HIV is not the cause of AIDS, although it does appear to be a factor.� Letter to Virusmyth.net, January, 2003 � Dr. Frank Shallenberger, MD, former professor, University of California School of Medicine at Davis and John F. Kennedy University in Orinda, California; Secretary, Orthomolecular Medical Society; Medical Board of Directors, Huxley Institute for Biosocial Research; Founding Director of the International Bio-Oxidative Medicine Foundation
�A campaign has been conducted to program us into believing that HIV is a deadly, infectious virus that inevitably results in AIDS and death. And we have been continually told that while no cure exists, antiviral drugs will slow down the progression of the disease. Despite evidence to the contrary, the general public continues to buy these ideas. They are the only ones reported. The fact is, there have always been people questioning or disagreeing with the official theory and treatment approach, but they have been silenced.� Penthouse, Nov, Dec, 1995
�No one, I repeat, no one under ANY circumstances should have the HIV test. It is a fraud. A complete and total fraud. And I defy any doctor, any scientist in this audience, to prove me wrong. Cross-reactions with non-HIV antibodies [false positives] have been documented in the presence of flu virus, common cold virus, herpes simplex 2, Hepatitis B, tuberculosis, leprosy, flu and hepatitis vaccines, pregnancy, blood transfusions, blood-clotting factor, [rectally deposited] sperm, [recreational] drug use, auto-immune diseases like lupus, arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis.�
�What do you think goes on in a person�s mind when they�re suddenly told that they have HIV, when in fact, you�re never tested for a virus. That�s not humanly possible, because no one to date has ever isolated the HIV virus. Well, think of what you would do when you went home. Your immune system would go right through the floor. You�d be depressed, you�d be anxious. You�d be terrified. You�d be paranoid.�
�Think of what would happen when you had to start telling everyone in your life that you had HIV. Your doctor would immediately�put you on the most toxic chemotherapies known. Chemotherapies that in a healthy individual will KILL you, will create the very symptoms that we�re calling AIDS. Five, six times a day you keep giving it chemotherapy. But you don�t give it chemotherapy for a month as some people with cancer have, or even two months. You have to take it every day for the rest of your life. And then, what had been a completely healthy, normal person now is dying. And they�re suffering from an iatrogenic, drug-induced, doctor-induced death.�
�There was no virus there. There was not even an antibody to the virus. [The test] was cross-reacting. Yep. And yet we still allow the fraud of AIDS research to continue on, where 100,000 scientists are bilking the American public for more money each year than is spent on cancer or heart disease.� Natural Living, WBAI Radio, 3/21/96 � Dr. Gary Null, PhD, syndicated host of Natural Living with Gary Null, author (AIDS, A Second Opinion), and a producer of PBS special programs. His Deconstructing the Myth of AIDS won the Audience Award for Best Documentary at both the New York and Los Angeles International Independent Film and Video Festivals.
�It is time to reexamine our commitment and the traditional approach taken thus far in dealing with [AIDS]. Gary Null asks tough questions and comes up with truly thought provoking answers. Have we all been taken in once again by Corporate America? Who has been profiting and who has been losing so far in the handling of the AIDS crisis?� �Aids, A Second Opinion� � Susan Sarandon, Actress, Activist
�[Gary] Null and co-author James Feast do us a service in giving voice to the point of view of AIDS dissidents such as Nobel laureates Drs. Mullis and Gilbert, as well as Professors Strohman and Rasnick, and the many others cited in the book [AIDS: A Second Opinion]. One has to wonder, why hasn�t their collective challenge to the �HIV equals AIDS equals death� paradigm been given more publicity? These are credentialed people, and there certainly is, as this book shows, reasonableness to their claims.�
�I myself have had three patients with advanced AIDS and substantially debilitated health who then undertook various natural protocols and improved their overall immune function significantly. So why wouldn�t I want to explore alternative approaches to this condition? Why wouldn�t I want to review as many scientific references as possible that support these approaches? I am happy to have a book on hand that goes beyond the party line of those who run the war on AIDS, looks at alternative perspectives, and provides extensive documentation to support them.
�Furthermore, I plan to make this book required reading for all of the persons I counsel with AIDS-defining illnesses. And I would recommend it to every concerned and conscientious physician, nurse, and public health advocate in the country.� Review of �Aids, A Second Opinion,� Amazon.com, June 18, 2002 � Dr. Martin Feldman, MD, Assistant Clinical Professor of Neurology at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, graduate of Columbia University�s College of Physicians and Surgeons, author of more than 50 articles published in peer-reviewed medical journals
�An intrinsic cytopathic [cell-harming] effect of the virus is no longer credible.� Nature, 12 Jan 1995
�...HIV is behaving more and more like a virus, without frills or special effects.� � Dr. Simon Wain-Hobson, Pasteur Institute, Paris
�HIV=AIDS=DEATH is a gross error. The medical community is providing deadly drugs to positive HIV patients, that will cause certain death to them. Then, the myth will be played on, with the doctor reporting that they died from AIDS, not from the complications of these deadly drugs. The madness must stop.�
�I personally have lost too many friends who did not become ill and die until they began their regimen of anti-HIV medicines.�
�You start out with a testing system that is riddled with false positives, then you treat them with lethal medications which impair the immune system, and then say ha ha you have an immune damaging disease called AIDS...� Virusmyth webboard � Dr. Craig Michael Uhl, MD, former U.S. Navy physician, California
�I�m not saying that it is impossible for unprotected vaginal intercourse to transmit HIV from a positive to a healthy adult negative partner. Anything�s possible. It�s possible to be struck by lightning. But the two risks share an analogous probability, effectively zero. If healthy, HIV-negative Americans want to worry about unprotected vaginal intercourse, they should worry about the drive over to their encounters. If their partners have never injected drugs or received rectal intercourse or blood therapy, they are more likely to be killed in an automobile accident on the ride over than they are to become HIV-positive.�
�The data show that frequency of receptive anal intercourse with an HIV-positive man and frequency of drug-injecting correlates with seroconversion. But frequency of unprotected vaginal intercourse with an HIV-positive person does not correlate with seroconversion, so that activity does not qualify as a risk factor. Everybody thinks that unprotected vaginal intercourse with an HIV-positive person will put you at risk for becoming HIV positive yourself. But this just isn�t the case.�
�It is not so easy to get all people who inject drugs or who participate in rectal intercourse to admit to these activities. Research and experience have shown us that people lie often and for many reasons, and that the content of these lies includes the IV [drug] and anal intercourse risk factors for HIV transmission. Such lying is one of the factors contributing to an inflated estimate of vaginal HIV transmission. A total liar rate of 5% is more than adequate to account for all the cases of HIV transmission and AIDS which are classified as heterosexual.�
�HIV researchers who publish these papers do not seem to be serious about accurately accounting for anal intercourse and drug injecting. The very studies that claim to document vaginal transmission show that coitus frequency does not correlate with seroconversion, but that frequency of receptive anal intercourse does.�
�In some special cases, and this may be true for HIV [tests], most of the positive results you get are false. So you run the risk of creating more heart attacks from false positives than identifying people who really are positive.�
�The gross exaggeration of AIDS risk to healthy, non-IVDU heterosexuals is not only psychologically damaging, but also constitutes unethical behavior on the part of many public health officials, journalists, and others.� Reappraising AIDS; Sex at Risk: Lifetime Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse, and the Low AIDS Risk of Vaginal Intercourse (1997); Archives of Sexual Behavior 1995 � Dr. Stuart Brody, PhD, Adjunct Research Associate Professor of Medical Psychology, University of Tubingen, Germany. Author, Sex at Risk
�It is possible to suggest not only that the AIDS �epidemic� is vastly overstated and overrated, but also that resources spent fighting it might better be employed on more basic, and more general, infrastructure and health needs...When medical realities collide with scaremongering and false realities, the latter too often triumph.�
�Even today, the cause for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS or HIV/AIDS) remains controversial...The virus does not seem to directly damage many cells but is thought to impede immune system function.�
�Some scientists find that other physiological insults, such as overwhelming and repeated infections from contaminated IV needles used by drug abusers and from homosexual sexual activity, overwhelm and weaken the immune system, and cause most AIDS cases.�
�On top of these controversies, the criteria for diagnosing AIDS have changed three or four times. And each time the criteria change, the number of people qualifying for the diagnosis increases.�
�In the past, a person might have HIV antibodies and tuberculosis; nowadays, this counts as HIV/AIDS, as do dozens of other combinations of signs and symptoms. These changing criteria result in higher numbers of people being diagnosed with AIDS with each change in the criteria, creating an epidemic of diagnostic �grade inflation.��
�In Africa, poverty, distance and isolation make accurate, continent-wide diagnosis and statistics impossible. As a result, most health and population statistics are estimates or guesses, often driven by political and cultural agendas and always driven by the need to generate more outside funding from wealthier regions of the world. Thus, the severity of just about everything gets �oversold.� This is especially true for AIDS...�
�AIDS information is also difficult to assess because the definition of AIDS is different in Africa. Indeed, blood test results don�t even figure in the official diagnostic criteria. �It�s all done on �points� defined at the �AIDS in Africa� meeting in Bangui in October 1985...the meeting participants concluded that AIDS in Africa could be diagnosed without a blood test by scoring 12 points out of a possible total of 50, based on symptoms and signs alone. �People having the first three (10 percent weight lost, protracted asthenia [weakness] and repeated attacks of fever for more than a month) have already racked up a score of 11. A cough scores two more points, and �the diagnosis of AIDS is established.��
�Many other non-specific signs are worth points, such as diarrhea, lung disease, signs consistent with herpes virus infections, generalized lymph node enlargement and �neurological signs.� In other words, many Africans diagnosed with AIDS would not carry the diagnosis in the developed world. And many people have these qualifying symptoms from the many other diseases prevalent in poor regions.�
�But if it is impossible to determine the extent of the epidemic, it should be easy to tell whether AIDS has, as predicted, �decimated� sub-Saharan Africa. Clearly, this has not happened. Sub-Saharan Africa�s population is estimated to have increased by 73 percent over the last two decades, to 752 million (according to the Population Reference Bureau�s 2005 World Population Data Sheet at https://www.prb.org/pdf05/05WorldDataSheet_Eng.pdf)...�
�In another analysis, South Africa�s population continues to grow at a rate most consistent with �no AIDS� projections. In other words, predictions based on the hypothesis that AIDS kills have not come true.�
�But even if these population estimates are way off, one implication is clear. Committing resources to fight a non-existent epidemic makes no sense, except to those making a living off the funds generated by the scares. Resources fighting phantom epidemics can�t be used to improve basic sanitation and nutrition, the foundations of health.�
�In sum, it is quite possible that fighting AIDS as the scaremongers desire would kill and sicken more people than AIDS treatment would save.� Jewish World Review, Nov. 18, 2005 � Michael Arnold Glueck, MD, Harvard University, Medical Writer. � Robert J. Cihak, MD, Harvard University, Past President, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and a Discovery Institute Senior Fellow
Morally, the constructive course to follow in sub-Saharan Africa on AIDS would be for the developed nations of the world to provide or lend money to African countries: leave these countries to move forward with desperately needed improvements in sanitation, to rebuild infrastructures that bring adequate medical care to citizens afflicted by poverty-related diseases, to relieve conditions that breed malnutrition (which perpetuates susceptibility to the many illnesses that have ravaged Africa for centuries).
Above all, first wait and see if such improvements lower the death rates among Africans. Then, if the alarming rise in deaths reported in recent years doesn't abate, consider HIV as a possible reason, and lend money on the stipulation that it must be used to block the spread of AIDS. Then, but only then, get on with the condomizing of sub-Saharan Africa, of every "underdeveloped" nation on the globe where AIDS has manifested.
Books have been published on why the more likely course is the one that Western governments and non-governmental organizations have already shamelessly, evangelically taken,11 the one that promises profits for the US and a sprinkle of other high-tech countries through what is essentially a medical form of neocolonialism, the one that portends an immense disaster for black Africans, especially women and children. Note well in this connection: in university studies where Africans clinically diagnosed with AIDS (according to the Bangui definition and its variants) are tested serologically for HIV, the majority of the test results prove antibody-negative! Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients, January 2006 https://townsendletter.com/Jan2006/newyork0106.htm � Marcus A. Cohen, Medical Columnist, Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, Author: Lyme Disease Update: Science, Policy & Law, New York
�Dr. R. Mathias, a virologist and epidemiologist at the University of British Columbia, has stated categorically, �There is no heterosexual spread of AIDS.��
�In [sub-Saharan Africa], national figures on HIV/AIDS are based on inappropriate extrapolations from hospitalized patients and clients of STD clinics. The second circumstance is that most of the testing in Africa is unsupervised, not validated and conducted in dysfunctional laboratories using out-of-date reagents. The third is that the World Health Organization�s clinical case definition for AIDS in Africa permits the diagnosis to be made based on the presence of weight loss, chronic diarrhea, prolonged fever and persistent cough. These conditions are neither new nor uncommon in Africa, Asia or India. Thus, the numbers quoted by the authors should be considered from a critical and sceptical perspective.�
�It is necessary to emphasize that the HIV test does not confirm the presence of HIV. Rather, it confirms the existence of markers that may (or may not) be surrogate identifiers for the virus... Until HIV is isolated and purified from infected cases, it is impossible to determine if the antibody reactions to it are truly specific or examples of cross-reactivity. According to Dr. de Harven, �Back in 1993 it became clear that the so-called HIV antibody tests badly lacked specificity, cross-reactivity being observed with patients suffering froma long list of pathological conditions.� Therefore, the value of HIV tests must be questioned no matter how often they are performed on a single sample.�
�Dr. Nutt and her fellow writers believe that a test that is 99.9% accurate limits �the opportunity for either false negative or false positive results.� A simple calculation demonstrates the inaccuracy of this statement: The specificity of a test is its ability to recognize individuals who do not have the condition. An accuracy of 99.9% means that the test will fail to identify that 0.1% of the subjects do not have the disease. These people will be recorded as positive responders, when in reality they are false positives.
�For the purposes of this calculation, it will be assumed that Canada has a population of 30,003,000 and that there are 3,000 new cases of HIV infection per year. If the entire population was tested, the results should identify the 3,000 truly positive individuals. However, since the test is not 100% accurate, it would fail in 0.1% of tests on the remaining 30,000,000 to recognize that they do not have the infection. Unfortunately, 0.1% of 30 million is 30,000. Therefore, for the 3,000 true positives that the test would reveal, it would falsely identify 30,000 Canadians as being infected. A ratio of 10 to one in favour of false positives is unacceptable considering the emotional, financial and medical burdens that accompany the diagnosis of HIV infection and, by extension, AIDS.�
�The calculation demonstrates the inherent liabilities of tests that rely upon possible markers for a micro-organism rather than the verifiable presence of the causative agent.�
�Since the late 1980s and with increasing influence, an international group of prominent scientists (including Nobel laureates), medical researchers, lawyers, politicians and informed laypersons has had the courage, wisdom and tenacity to challenge the official dogma on HIV and AIDS. In the process it has amassed a considerable volume of pertinent literature.� Journal of the Canadian Dental Association. 1999; 65:337-40 � John Hardie, BDS, MSc, PhD, FRCDC. Clinical Director, Dental Services, DownLisburn Trust, County Antrim. Northern Ireland.
�Almost all reactions (on the HIV tests) especially in low-risk populations, represent false positive results.� 1992. �Identification of crossreactive epitopes recognized by HIV- false-positive sera.� AIDS. 6: 1547-1548 � Langedijk, Vos, W., Doornum, G, et al, Aids researchers
�90 percent of positive tests in low-risk populations are in fact false. Falsely labeling individuals applying for marriage licenses, pregnant women, health care workers and patients admitted to the hospital as carrying the virus is certainly irresponsible and can have an enormous psychological and social impact on the individuals.� American Journal of Epidemiology, 1992 � Dr. Xin M. Tu, PhD, Harvard University School of Public Health, Associate Professor, Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania
�These tests are not accurate; they are a treacherous deception and making any life-and-death decisions based on a positive antibody test is a very foolish thing to do. It can only lead to tragedy.� Playing Russian Roulette In The Laboratory, Virusmyth.net � Christine Johnson, science journalist, Los Angeles, member of MENSA, is on the Board of Advisors of Continuum magazine and is a former copy-editor of Reappraising AIDS.
�There are several risks associated with HIV/AIDS, but the most important immediate risk, soon after an individual becomes aware of his/her HIV status, is committing suicide. This is as a result of sudden unexpected, unprepared disclosure of HIV test result, leading to mental breakdown, i.e., severe acute depression.�
�A study carried out in New York City (1997) found that 9% of suicide victims were HIV positive. The HIV seroconversion among the victims of suicide was found to be twice that of the general population.�
�Currently, HIV/AIDS is the commonest cause of acute depression�Critical psychosocial stressors of HIV/AIDS including social stigma, discrimination, isolation, lack of support from family and friends, and social devaluation, enhance suicide risk.�
��This is a nine-fold increase in female fatal poisoning, and twenty-two times increase in the spread of HIV/AIDS. This could be possible as in recent years, several right-to-die groups have advocated that individuals with AIDS use poisoning as a means of self-inflicted death. However, more than two-thirds of HIV-positive suicide victims continue to use more violent means such as hanging, firearms, and other violent methods.� Anil Aggrawal�s Internet Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 2003 � Dr. B.L. Meel, MD, Head, Department of Forensic Medicine, University of Transkei, South Africa
�The recent suicide attempt in Mumbai by an AIDS patient who also poisoned his wife and killed his two minor children, has raised concern regarding the counselling given to HIV positive patients in public hospitals...� �AIDS patients get little counseling.� The Times of India, August 28, 2000 � Roli Srivastava, Journalist
�Despite the fact we�re told HIV is forever here are drug addicts who gave up drugs, started to live a more healthy lifestyle and their antibody tests reverted to negative. And their T4s returned to normal. And most telling of all, they were alive twenty years later to tell the tale. The tragedy is that these HIV tests were introduced in the total absence of proof of their specificity. This is the trouble with this so-called AIDS science. Another mystery�what is considered HIV positive depends on where and by whom the test is done. So if you�re positive in New York City [or Thailand or Africa] just get on a plane and come to Australia. You might no longer be positive.�
�I�d say don�t have a test. Don�t spread HIV testing.� Continuum, Winter 1997 � Dr. Valendar Turner, MD, Royal Perth Hospital, University of Western Australia
�I do not regard the causal relationship between HIV and any disease as settled. I have seen considerable evidence that highly improper statistics concerning HIV and AIDS have been passed off as science, and that top members of the scientific establishment have�joined the media in spreading misinformation about the nature of AIDS.� Yale Scientific, Fall 1994
�There is currently ongoing a phenomenon of collective misinformation, promoted by�the [NIH and CDC] directly concerned with HIV and AIDS. Both the general press (e.g. the New York Times) and the scientific journals such as Nature and Science, propagate misinformation uncritically, and suppress information which goes against the orthodox position that �HIV is the virus that causes AIDS.��
�So-called scientific articles about HIV and AIDS are written under the automatic assumption that HIV is the cause of certain diseases by killing CD4 T-cells.�
�To question the HIV pathogenesis hypothesis�entails social, scientific and financial ostracism when coming from someone inside the biomedical establishment.�
��HIV is neither the cause of T-cell destruction, nor of harm to the immune system. The lack of control groups and the lack of �robust appraisal� [in Ho & Shaw�s experiments] has caused a systematic bias for the interpretation of the data in favor of HIV pathogenesis.�
��Recently in the State of Maine�a woman Valerie Emerson with four children was HIV positive, as well as her 3 year old daughter and 4 year old son�The two who were positive�were prescribed AZT. The little girl died, suffering terribly. Her death was attributed to AIDS by the newspapers. The son Nikolas�was given AZT. He then became seriously ill. The mother discontinued the AZT�and the son became well�However, officials of the State of Maine then started legal action against the mother to take the child away from her. In September 1998, a judge ruled against the officials. The boy is now running around like any healthy four year old��
��I regard as dangerous to censor or suppress information, and to allow a situation to develop when people appear unable to distinguish between facts and an orthodox view. The [Aids] orthodox view is accepted uncritically by people at large as a result of mass conditioning by the media�s uncritical acceptance of the scientific orthodoxy, and the refusal to publish information which goes counter to the orthodoxy.� Yale Scientific, Spring 1999
�The entire Gallo affair provides evidence of the way the scientific community is unable to police itself...Scientists should be subject to the same laws as other citizens so far as criminal behaviour is concerned.� �Challenges�, Springer Verlag 1998
�The hypotheses that HIV is a harmless virus and that drugs cause AIDS defining diseases are compatible with all the evidence I know.� Letter to National Academy of sciences, 1997
��Thus the [National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases� Aids] �Fact Sheet� does not contain facts. It contains propaganda. It continues to provide evidence that you guys at NIH, CDC, NIAID can�t tell the difference between a fact and a hole in the ground.� Letter to CDC Director David Satcher � Yale Scientific, Spring 1999
�I regard as scandalous the continued ostracism of people and points of view which go against the orthodoxy on HIV. Shame on Einstein College of Medicine faculty for participating in this ostracism or tolerating it.� Response to Einstein faculty�s vetoing of a speaking invitation to Dr. Peter Duesberg
�To continue past criticisms of CDC publications, I enclose some offhand comments concerning the December 1996 CDC HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report. I find internal and external inconsistencies, meaningless figures, and overall propaganda rather than science or medicine.�
�...The categories used for the CDC statistics at present in connection with AIDS constitute obstructions to dealing with this more precise question. These statistics are systematically biased in favor of HIV pathogeny.�
�The variation of figures, depending on the pre-1987 definition, the 1987 definition, the December 1992 definition, and the latest December 1996 definition on the front page of the Surveillance Report create such a chaos that just on this count, the whole production is questionable. I call it statistical garbage. Furthermore, the statistics are anyhow manipulated in other ways.
�The figure of �581,429 persons with AIDS� reported to CDC p. 5, first paragraph, is a garbage figure. First, it is not clear what AIDS means in this figure, i.e. which definition was used. Second, the figure is cumulative, so presumably it depends on different definitions over 15 years.�
�Although there are occasional categories about injective drug users, there are no categories for the poppers or cocaine users. The absence of such categories biases the drug statistics in favor of the HIV pathogeny hypothesis and against the drug pathogeny hypothesis.�
�The use of �statistical methods,� p.5, column 1, line -2, in plain english means that statistics were manipulated in some undetermined way, so again, what does the figure 581,429 mean? Down to the last unit digit?�
�The CDC Report is written under the unstated axiom that there is such a thing as �HIV disease�, whatever that means. Then officials try to fit experimental facts into this axiom, and are thereby led to what are euphemistically called �paradoxes�, actually inconsistencies and contradictions.� Letter to CDC director David Satcher, 12 August 1997 � Dr. Serge Lang, PhD, Professor of Mathematics, Yale University; awarded the Dylan Hixon �88 Prize for Teaching Excellence in the Natural Sciences; also the Steel and Cole prizes of the American Mathematical Society; Author of 37 books; former Fulbright Scholar; Member, US National Academy of Sciences.
�The principles of causation cannot sustain the HIV-causes-AIDS hypothesis. For all we know, it is not HIV that causes AIDS, but the so-called co-factors such as indiscriminate antibiotic use, recreational drugs, poverty, malnutrition, polluted water and pesticised food. AZT and the like (so-called triple therapy) are rank cytotoxic poisons. To give AZT to pregnant women is a crime against the mother and the baby she is making.�
�The voodoo effect of an HIV/AIDS diagnosis must be avoided. The iatrogenic voodoo effect is a potent depressor of a person�s immunity.� Speech to the South African government�s AIDS Panel, 2000
�We are groping in the dark about a virus which has not been isolated, and are taking the general public for a ride. An intellectual analysis is necessary. The HIV test relies on detecting certain antibodies. This test for HIV is highly doubtful and the number of false positives needs to be investigated before firm conclusions are drawn.� https://www.humanscapeindia.net/humanscape/hs1200/hs12002t.htm
�Mr Brink�s book will have an Illichean impact likely to cure the increasingly sick HIV-AIDS establishment in particular and the medical and governmental establishments in general. His expose is both a diagnosis and a cure� [It] will remain a classic eye-opener to the misdeeds of modern medicine for decades to come.� Review, �Debating AZT� � Dr. Manu Kothari, MD, Professor of Anatomy, former Head of Department of Anatomy, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College, King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
�Let�s stop poisoning of babies and innocent people with antiretroviral therapy!!!� Kim Bannon Petition, 21 Jan 2005 � Renzo Pareja Valencia, DDS, Dental Surgeon, Lima, Peru
�HIV is an ordinary retrovirus. There is nothing about this virus that is unique. Everything that is discovered about HIV has an analogue in other retroviruses that don�t cause AIDS. HIV only contains a very small piece of genetic information. There�s no way it can do all these elaborate things they say it does.�
�A powerful hypothesis has to explain and predict. I ask you, what kind of scientist continues to support a hypothesis [HIV=AIDS] that fails to explain and fails to predict? We�ve been willing to turn immunology upside-down and inside out.� Spin June 1992
�HIV/AIDS [is] the biggest medical mistake and fraud of the past 500 years.�
�There are thousands of documented cases, from Africa in particular, of clinically reportable AIDS in which HIV testing has been done and found to be negative. I think it�s amongst the strongest arguments that HIV is irrelevant to the development of AIDS in at least some cases if not all cases.�
�Some of these tests are so non-specific that 80 - 90% of the positives that are picked up are false positives. And when one realises that these tests are being pushed in a context in which we have to test as many people as possible, the inevitable outcome is that the figures for HIV infections in Africa will become wildly exaggerated and feed into a very, very deadly self-fulfilling prophesy.�
�These girls are consuming hard drugs in a smokeable form � namely, heroin and cocaine, in vilely adulterated versions for the first time in the history of Africa. And these drugs began to make their way into Abidjan in 1985-�86. They are epidemic amongst certain classes of prostitutes right now, and these are the only girls that are getting sick. It looks like AIDS because these girls are wasted both because of the direct effect of the drugs and because they use what little money they have on drugs, rather than on food.� Aids and Africa, Meditel, London 1993 � Harvey Bialy, PhD. Founding and scientific editor, Nature Biotechnology (1983-1996). Resident Scholar, Institute of Biotechnology/Autonomous National University of Mexico (1996-2006), Member, South Africa Presidential Aids Advisory Panel (2000-present). Author of Oncogenes, Aneuploidy and AIDS: A Scientific Life & Times of Peter H. Duesberg.
�We�re all unique. If you give agent X to ten people, will they all get the same disease? No. HIV is a reductionist model that has failed.� Osler�s web; inside the labyrinth of the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome epidemic, 1996 � Dr. Paul Cheney, MD, PhD, internist, North Carolina
�I remember vividly the early years, and seeing those AZT patients, and they just had no bone marrow left and that was it. They think AZT wasn�t so good and the new drugs are better, but they have no idea that we killed a whole generation of AIDS patients with AZT. Especially in the early high doses of 1200 and 1500 milligrams. That was just murder.� New York Press 25 May 2000
�In my experience, I have seen that those who do not take any of these AIDS drugs are the ones who remain healthy and survive. I treat the individual symptoms � the whole person, not just the virus. I treat them for whatever they are suffering from, and that�s that. I have not lost a single patient in seven years and I�ve never used cocktail therapy.� Gear, March 2000
�You are pointing to a very important problem, concerning the validity of HIV tests. It�s even more complicated � there is crossreactivity between HIV-1 and antibodies found in leprosy and tuberculosis bacterias. So you will not know whether a patient is HIV-positive because he has tuberculosis or he has tuberculosis because he is HIV-positive. Treat tuberculosis and don�t care about HIV. I have done this for many years and nobody died.� BMJ RR, 27 Jan 2002 � Dr. Claus Koehnlein, MD, AIDS and Internal Medicine specialist, Kiel, Germany. Co-author of Virus Mania.
�I was convinced by the data presented by Peter Duesberg, David Rasnick and Sam Mhlongo during a conference in Senago, Italy, that governments and the pharmaceutical industry have colluded in disseminating disinformation about HIV-AIDS in order to reap huge profits from the sale of drugs. They are doing the same with drugs for treatment of mental illness. In fact, the pharms now own and dictate to the American Psychiatric Association and the academic departments of psychiatry. This is not to deny that drugs are sometimes necessary in the control of acute and violent emotional crises.�
�When the [Aids] epidemic first appeared I was struck by the following fact: whereas in the case of tuberculosis (and other infectious diseases), the agent was only the necessary, but not the sufficient cause of the disease, why was not the same principle applied to HIV-AIDS? It is well known that clinical depression, a disease of the soul, depresses the immune system and thus becomes part of the cause of the disease of the body. And yet, there has been an enormous neglect of the psychological co-factors in HIV-AIDS.� Letter to Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society � Zvi Lothane, MD, Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, City University of New York. Author, In Defense of Schreber: Soul Murder and Psychiatry
�Already a few years ago I formed the opinion that Dr. Duesberg�s work contained the most accurate [AIDS] findings and I have read and researched almost everything that exists about AIDS. When I fell upon Duesberg�s work I realized that, step by step something was becoming quite clear�namely that the AIDS problem is very much �wide spread� and that it has little or even nothing at all to do with the HIV virus.� Nina Hagen interview, aliveandwell.org � Dr. Bob L. Owen, PhD, author, Roger�s Recovery from AIDS
�I am suspect about everything involved in this AIDS epidemic, because if HIV causes anything, it certainly causes fund-raisers. It sells stocks. It supports dances. It sells condoms. And it keeps the AIDS establishment going.� Penthouse Dec. 1995 � Dr. Frank Buianouckas, PhD, Professor of Mathematics, City University of New York
�The cause of AIDS is multifactorial. HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994 � Dr. Lawrence Bradford, PhD, Associate Professor of Biology, Benedictine College, Kansas
�A kind of collective insanity over HIV and AIDS has gripped leaders of the scientific and medical profession. They have stopped behaving as scientists, and instead are working as propagandists, trying desperately to keep alive a failed theory.� Sunday Times (London), May 1, 1994
�Recently there�s been more and more work published by the mainstream acknowledging this fact that the whole idea of the virus killing of the T cells hasn�t been acknowledged by experimental work.�
�There are a good number of scientists who argue that these treatments are the cause of AIDS because there is no known mechanism by which this purported virus could be doing the damage that�s attributed to it. A steady diet of chemotherapy is a perfectly rational description of why some AIDS patients suffer from terrible muscle wasting and debilitating diseases.� Aids, a Second Opinion
�An authoritative new study has uncovered powerful evidence that the �Aids test� is scientifically invalid, misleading millions into believing they are HIV positive when they are not infected with the virus...They have heightened concerns that the spread of Aids in Africa has been wildly exaggerated.� Sunday Times (London) 22 May 1994
�The side effects of some of the antiviral drugs that were prescribed in hopes of defeating this illness have actually been a central part of the AIDS syndrome during the second half of the �80�s and onwards. I�m afraid that they have become responsible for widening the scope of this immune system failure, perhaps to people who wouldn�t have become ill but who, because of testing positive for some reason were put on these drugs.� Aids, a Second Opinion
�I started studying Duesberg�s papers and I studied the responses that had come and I concluded that they weren�t scientific responses, they were just abuse. I was astonished. We set out the fact that there was�a group for the reappraisal of the HIV=AIDS hypothesis�We ran a front page story about that�and once again the response [from the medical establishment] was hysterical�Just, �Everybody knows HIV is the cause of AIDS. These are old arguments.� Things like that. �Why trouble your readers with unproven theories when there�s a big public health emergency underway?� But nothing that actually answered the really detailed points that Duesberg and others were putting forward.�
��We reported�that [Luc Montagnier] was saying there were AIDS cases without HIV and also that he was now quite sure that you could have HIV and not get AIDS�that HIV was NOT capable of killing the cells of the immune system on its own�So right at that point there was a very strong case for reappraisal, but instead of thanking us for putting this before the newspaper-reading public, we just got this very very abusive response�[They obviously weren�t able to argue scientifically.] That was exactly the feeling. There was no rebuttal on any of the points in that article. No argument against it. Simply an expostulation that you shouldn�t worry the public in this way.� Continuum Nov/Jan 1994-95
�It�s too awful for the AIDS mainstream to contemplate that they could have gotten it wrong at that base level after all those years of work... After all, millions of people have been told they�re infected with a deadly new virus on the basis of the HIV test. Supposing that�s wrong. It�s a huge burden of responsibility.�
�It�s almost as though the world of science and medicine itself, which is a very proud and well-meaning world, wants to do good. It wants to make money, but it wants to do good too. People working within it have professional standards and it�s almost as if to contemplate the possibility of such a damaging error [that HIV doesn�t cause AIDS] is too much to face. For that reason, the good scientists who are raising these questions are being marginalized.� Aids, a Second Opinion
��So, how did they define the proteins as being from HIV? Amazingly, on the basis of selecting proteins most reactive with antibodies in blood samples from AIDS patients and those at risk of AIDS. This means that HIV antigens are being defined as such on the basis that they react with antibodies in AIDS patients, and AIDS patients are then diagnosed as being infected with HIV on the basis that they have antibodies reactive with those same antigens. The reasoning is entirely circular�which is probably why [Dr. Thomas Zuck of the US Food and Drug Administration] was so emphatic that none of the �HIV tests� was suitable for confirming HIV infection.�
�To tell even one person that they are HIV-infected on the grounds that they have antibodies that react with the proteins in these unvalidated tests is an unwarranted assault�The tests have caused countless individuals to be falsely diagnosed and nations to be deceived into believing that HIV/AIDS is set to decimate their population.� The Business (UK), May 16/17, 2004 � Neville Hodgkinson, former Science Editor, The Times of London; author, AIDS: The Failure of Contemporary Science
�HIV, in spite of its name, does not cause immune deficiency nor the 30 various AIDS diseases. No scientific study has ever proven that it does. Recent surveys show that 97-100% of American AIDS occurs in chronic street drug and narcotic users, the newborns of drug abusing mothers and patients on anti-HIV therapy. Many patients have learned, some the hard way, that the antiviral drugs are highly toxic and often fatal while others have found that no treatment whatsoever is necessary for healthy survival with HIV.�
�We have many experiments on HIV positive humans under the guise of treatments that solidly prove that antiviral drugs are what are causing patient sickness and deaths. Videx (ddI) and Epivir (3TC) are noted for their ability to produce acute pancreatitis and acute hemorragic pancreatitis has an approximate 50% human fatality rate.�
�All the nucleoside analogs act the same way by blocking not only viral reproduction but also the reproduction of normal dividing cells. Protease inhibitors block a wide variety of normal enzymes and produce bizarre fat deposits, heart attacks, organ failures, extreme wasting of extremities, strokes and very high blood cholesterol levels.�
�It is sincerely hoped that our judges and attorneys will realize that these drugs are poisons, not cures, and that HIV requires no treatment for a patient�s healthy survival.� Journal of the Missouri Bar, vol. 55 (4) 1999
�If one were to peruse the 32 drugs listed in the PDR (Physicians Desk Reference) for the treatment of HIV they would find �Side Effects, Precautions and Contraindications� listed with each of the drugs. Review of these categories reveals much overlapping of side effects so, to avoid duplication of statistics, all three were lumped into one group for the purpose of this study. Fifty side effects were found and tabulated according to the percentage of drugs in which they can occur. The results were as follows:
Nausea�56%; Vomiting and diarrhea�50%; Rash�46%; Liver failure, gastroenteritis and diabetes mellitus�34%; The US Food and Drug Administration says all nine of the protease inhibitors in this group can produce diabetes mellitus. Lactic acidosis, myalgia [muscle pain], myositis [muscle inflammation] (potentially fatal)�31%; Chills and fever�28%; Headache and elevated blood lipid levels�25%; Peripheral neuropathy [nerve damage resulting in burning or numbing sensations]�21%; Lipodystrophy [fat redistribution], pancreatitis [pancreas failure] and hepatomegaly�18%; Pneumonia�15%; Fatigue and arthritis�12%; Myopathy and granulocytopenia�9%; Dyspnea, rectal hemorrhage, abdominal pain, dizziness, anemia and depression�6%.
The following side effects were mentioned in only one drug category: Ataxia, elevated amylase level, asthenia, infections, stomach ulcers, leg cramps, Grand Mal seizures, brain hemorrhage, paralysis, renal failure, hyperbilirubinemia, amblylopia [impaired vision], anxiety, suicidal tendency, bronchitis, neutropenia, hypertension, cardiac arrhythmia, pancytopenia and the Steven-Johnson syndrome.
If one were to include all of the various combinations of these antiviral drugs which have been prescribed for patients, the list of side effects would grow exponentially. In view of the side effects of these antiviral drugs and because HIV has yet to be isolated and identified, plus the fact that none of the HIV tests actually detect an AIDS virus, one wonders why anyone would take these medications for any reason.� Personal correspondence to David Crowe, May 2006. � Robert G. Murray, MD, Missouri.
I join [the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the Hiv-Aids Hypothesis] for three reasons:
(1) My interest in philosophy of science and scientific method compels me to recognize the inadequacy of the single agent explanation for AIDS;
(2) I am a public sector attorney who strongly believes that current public policy favoring single agent HIV research to the exclusion of multiple agent research is in all likelihood driven by greed and must be abated; and
(3) As a concerned human being it is my duty to help those who suffer from AIDS. My sincere thanks to those who have designed the virusmyth web site and republished scholarly research that is astoundingly well written and intellgible, even to a lawyer like me.
The web site has opened my eyes and commanded my attention like nothing else. This problem is a multidisciplinary phenomenon and requires a multidisciplinary approach. I hope people ask and allow me to contribute my skills as an attorney to achieve the aims of this Group. Comments on signing the �Virus Myth� petition. � John Szczubelek, JD, Assistant Attorney General, State of Michigan
�The paradigm that was laid down for how to milk the cancer problem is basically the same paradigm which is being followed in milking the AIDS problem.� Penthouse Dec. 1995 � Dr. Ralph Moss, author, The Cancer Industry
�There is no way that AIDS can be an infectious disease. Something else must be going on. The more likely interpretation is that HIV and immune dysfunction � rather than HIV being a cause and immune dysfunction being a consequence � are both consequences of something else.� Penthouse April 1994 � Dr. Casper Schmidt, MD, New York
�Dominated by the media, by pressure groups and by the interests of pharmaceutical companies, the AIDS establishment lost contact with open-minded, peer-reviewed science since the unproven HIV/AIDS hypothesis received 100% of the research funds while all other hypotheses were ignored. How many wasted efforts, how many billions of research dollars gone up in smoke... Horrible.� Reappraising AIDS Nov./Dec. 1998
�Obviously, the HIV/AIDS hypothesis has to be scientifically reappraised. And, most urgently, the funding for Aids research should no longer be restricted to laboratories working on a hypothesis which has never been proven.� Continuum Spring 1998
�Current policies for helping Africa in what has been described as the AIDS crisis, are entirely based on the validity of the HIV=AIDS hypothesis. However, this hypothesis must be completely reappraised because HIV has never been isolated nor purified, directly from AIDS patients, in a way that would satisfy the classic requirements of virology. More specifically:
�1) HIV particles have never been demonstrated by electron microscopy in the blood stream of AIDS patients allegedly presenting with high �viral load.�
�2) Alleged HIV isolations have been reported, based on the identification of molecular �markers.� These markers are of physical, biological or genetic nature. Their HIV specificity could never be rigorously demonstrated because such demonstration would have necessitated HIV purification that has never been achieved.
�3) Serological tests for so-called �HIV seropositivity,� being based on the same non specific markers, also lack specificity and do not demonstrate any HIV infectious process.
�4) Public credulity is abused by the constant publication of HIV images that all derive from electron microscopy of laboratory cell cultures, and never derive directly from AIDS patients.�
�In view of these major uncertainties concerning HIV isolation directly from AIDS patients, priorities should be drastically revised. Suspending all HIV sero-testing, and suspending administration of anti-retroviral toxic medications should make budgets available to combat malnutrition, extend drinking water distribution, and improve hygiene and sanitation for the African people.� December 8, 2003, address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels
�The role played by international pharma companies is more than dubious. In fact, it�s close to pharmaceutical genocide. Improving the control of tropical infectious diseases is a complex endeavour. Instead, AIDS is a single culprit with great profitability.� May 2002, Times of India � Dr. Etienne de Harven, MD, Emeritus Professor of Pathology, University of Toronto (1981-1993). Professor of Cell Biology, Cornell Graduate School of Medical Science (1968-1981). Associate Professor (1964-1968). Assistant Professor, Pathology. Universit� Libre de Bruxells (1956-1962). Belgian Air Force Medical Corps (1953-1956). Author of over 100 peer-reviewed medical papers on virology, cancer, immunology and electron microscopy.
�We are led to believe there is uncontestable, cast-iron proof that AIDS is caused by HIV. We naturally assume that the cell preparations used in experiments have been demonstrated to be free of contaminants by the usual rigorous tests for microbiological purity - and especially by electron microscopy. We take it for granted that the possibility that infective particles other than HIV are the causal agents has been ruled out by exhaustive, rigorously conducted experiments.
It is therefore an eye-opener to read from this book that such evidence that AIDS is solely caused by HIV does not exist, and that research into autoimmune diseases in general leaves much to be desired. The absolute purity of cell preparations used in many experiments is to be seriously questioned. Koch�s postulates have not been proven.�
�It is not uncommon for those whose views, however justified, which go against the grain of current scientific beliefs to be ignored or even derided. Unfortunately, Lynn Margulis� experience in the early 1970s is but one of many examples of this. Sadly, there have also been recent examples of ostracism of those who dare to question whether HIV is the causal agent of AIDS.� Foreword to �AIDS, Cancer and Arthritis - A New Perspective� � Sir David Smith, MA, DPhil, FRS, FRSE. Biologist. Fellow of the Royal Society. Founder Member of the International Society of Endocytobiology. Principle of Edinburgh University 1989 � 1994. Head of the largest graduate college (Wolfson) Oxford University 1994 � 2000. Currently government adviser on environmental concerns.
�A wrong turning was taken in 1970, which has not only impeded progress in cancer research but has led to the retrovirus/HIV equals AIDS concept, which according to a number of investigators is a total misconception. Their doubts are basically concerned with the haste with which certain valid important observations were adopted by the retroviral cause without due cognisance being taken of alternative explanations and that this state of affairs has been very considerably compounded by the use of uncontrolled techniques.�
�The latter seem to have occurred because biochemists, who in my experience usually have a poor understanding of microorganisms as living creatures and have a tendency to regard bacteria as laboratory tools - for example, as bags of enzymes or as culture media for the propagation of designer plasmids - and believe that biochemical techniques are all that is necessary for the identification and isolation of viruses. Frequently medically trained individuals regard micro-organisms as basically potential pathogens and all too often, where AIDS research is concerned, they have adopted the same techniques employed by the biochemists.�
�The result of this simplistic approach is that it has been accompanied by the virtual abandonment of that sine qua non for a properly trained microbiologist, the microscope, and in the case of filterable forms of bacteria and viruses this means the electron-microscope. Without these aids and the controls that they offer, it has become apparent that what have passed as preparations of pure virions have in fact been contaminated not only with filterable forms of bacteria but also with cellular materials derived from the tissue-cultures in which the viruses have been cultured.� Preface to �AIDS, Cancer and Arthritis � A New Perspective� � Phyllis Pease, DSc, PhD, Former Senior Lecturer in Medical Microbiology, University of Birmingham, UK. Visiting researcher at University of Toulouse, France. Author AIDS, Cancer and Arthritis: A New Perspective (2005), L-Forms, Episomes and Autoimmune Disease (1965) and 70 papers on possible bacterial roles in immunopathology and related topics.
�We find the paucity of evidence published in standard peer-reviewed primary scientific journals that leads to the conclusion that �HIV causes AIDS� appalling. No amount of moralizing censorship, rhetorical tricks, consensus of opinion, pulling rank, obfuscation, ad hominem attacks or blustering newspaper editorials changes this fact. The conflation �HIV-AIDS� may be good marketing but is it science? No. Yet certainly the political and economic implications of the term �HIV-AIDS� are staggering.� Review of Harvey Bialy�s �Oncogenes, Aneuploidy and AIDS� on Amazon.com
�What is an HIV/AIDS denier? Or HIV/AIDS denialist? Peter Duesberg is a fine scientist, I have read his book and examined some of the scientific papers upon which it is based. From the CDC (Center for Disease Control) in Atlanta I have requested the scientific papers that prove the causal relationship between the HIV retrovirus and the IMMUNODEFICIENCY SYNDROME commonly known as AIDS. They have never sent even references to the peer-reviewed primary scientific literature that establishes the causal relationship because they can�t. Such papers do not exist.
I have seen all four of the films made by Colman Jones and colleagues in Toronto. Film #3 in the series is most telling. Although no strong evidence exists for any simple causal relationship what is clear is that the HIV claim is erroneous by the standards of microbiology and virology.
When I saw the glowing review of George Miklos, a colleague and a fiercely honest scientist, of Harvey Bialy�s book on the scientific life of Peter Duesberg I bought and read Harvey�s book. I have also read Celia Farber�s superb article in the Lewis Lapham �swansong� issue of Harper�s magazine, last March, I believe. Rebecca Culshaw�s paper on why she quit AIDS statistical research and Dr. Charles Geshekter�s unpublished manuscript about African AIDS, accepted by the editor and then rejected both substantiated my reluctance to accept the glib �HIV/AIDS� term. I found all of these readings far more convincing than any literature purported to show a HIV-AIDS causal connection.
I heard a talk by a �medical scientist� from the Harvard Medical School at a meeting at Roger Williams University in Rhode Island from a supposed expert who attempts to design an HIV vaccine. He claimed the HIV virus mutates a billion times in 48 hours. It became clear that the HIV virus has no clear identity. The HIV tests, often positive for pregnant women, that [have standards that] vary significantly in the US, Europe and Australia are particularly disturbing. My son-in-law, James di Properzio spent several months researching this story for the Common Review (the Great Books Foundation in Chicago). His findings were consistent with Celia Farber�s and after encouragement from the editor the board reviewed and rejected his draft.
�Science is the search for truth� said David Bohm, �whether we like it [the truth] or not. From my readings, discussions with knowledgeable scientists close to the story, I simply conclude, as does Kary Mullis, the Nobel Laureate who wrote a foreword to Duesberg�s classic work, that there is no evidence that �HIV causes AIDS�.� New AIDS Review https://newaidsreview.com/ � Lynn Margulis, PhD, Biologist, Distinguished Professor of Geosciences, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Originated the Endosymbiotic Theory for the origin of eukaryotic cells in 1966, which was ridiculed for years by the scientific establishment until proven in the 1980s. Recipient of the National Medal of Science (1999). Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1983. Author of over 130 scientific works and the books, Origin of Eukaryotic Cells, Early Life, Symbiosis as a Source of Evolutionary Innovation: Speciation and Morphogenesis, Symbiotic Planet: A New Look at Evolution, The Ice Chronicles: The Quest to Understand Global Climate Change and many others. The Library of Congress started to permanently archive all of her papers in 1998.
�Like most people, I assumed that AIDS was caused by a virus called HIV and dismissed Duesberg out of hand without even reading his book. Eventually, I read Bialy, then Duesberg, then everything I could find. I will be the first to admit, there�s a lot of technical stuff I do not understand in the literature. I do not know if HIV causes AIDS or not. But what I do know (subjectively as a writer who had to translate complex medical topics into plain English) is that the folks who question the HIV-AIDS hypothesis do a much better job of presenting clear, logical arguments with citations to the primary science literature than do the folks who do not question the HIV-AIDS hypothesis.
I note that to be science, the research on HIV-AIDS would be as interested in falsifying the hypothesis as proving it. I could be wrong, but that does not seem to be the case. Duesberg on the other hand, suggests ways of testing his ideas.
I also note that things that might cast doubt on the veracity of individuals, such as Robert Gallo�s �co-discovery� of Montagnier�s virus or his lucrative patent from the AIDS test are strangely absent when the folks who believe that HIV is the cause of AIDS are telling their truths.
The absence of citations to primary scientific literature in the NIAID Fact Sheet �The Evidence That HIV Causes AIDS�, not to mention the misrepresentations and omissions it contains just smells funny.
I also think that designation of the HIV virus as the cause of AIDS and the patenting of the AIDS test preceding the evidence being published, peer reviewed, and reproduced is not a practice that gives me great confidence. What are the odds of this being a lucky guess?
I�m not convinced that the various AIDS tests are proof of infection by HIV because I cannot find any study that documents HIV being purified. Given the manufacturers� disclaimers on these products, their use as diagnostic tools is clearly �off label�. I wonder if this fact is shared with people being given their status as HIV+?
So you see, I have doubts, intuition, questions, appraisals and curiosity. Like you, I await convincing evidence.� Posting on �Barnesville� blog https://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world � James MacAllister, Medical Documentary Film Maker. Winner of many awards including First Prize in the Health Science Communications Association Awards, 1989, Continuing Education for Physicians category for Surgical Implantation Dermaport Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter; New England Chapter American Medical Writers Association, 1991, Audiovisual Award of Excellence for Recent Advances in Cranial Perforation; 1992 Video Publishing Award of Excellence for Minimizing Post Dural Puncture Headaches; 1993 Video Publishing Award of Excellence for Institute for the Study of Cardiovascular and Muscle Diseases; 1996 William Solimene Award for Audiovisual Media for Living Well with Diabetes Type I and many others.
�Contrary to popular belief, Peter Duesberg is not a quack. In fact, he is a widely acknowledged expert on retroviruses such as HIV. His credentials are impeccable: he is a professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and a member of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences. Nevertheless, Dusberg is regarded by the uninformed as a quack because he has dared to scientifically investigate whether the retrovirus HIV actually causes the complex of diseases known as AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) � which has widely been asserted without proof � and has had the courage to report that research shows the answer is that HIV is not the cause of AIDS.�
�In this excellent book Prof. Duesberg discusses in detail, but in a highly readable manner, both the retrovirus HIV and the syndrome AIDS and shows that they are not the same things. In fact, AIDS is not itself a single disease but, rather, is a complex of more than 20 separate diseases. The one commonality of the diseases in the AIDS syndrome is not HIV infection but the fact that they rarely infect people with healthy immune systems. In general, people who acquire any of the AIDS diseases have deficient immune systems. In poor countries, especially in Africa where the incidence of AIDS is high, immune deficiency is mainly due to severe malnutrition. In the developed world, including the U.S., immune deficiency is often caused by deleterious lifestyle behavior, including drug use. A person whose immune system is severely weakened is then vulnerable to the diseases in the AIDS complex. Immune-deficient people often also catch HIV which is why HIV and AIDS often � but definitely not always � are found together. However, HIV can also occur in people who do not suffer from AIDS and never will. A positive test for HIV antibodies merely means that at some time a person has been infected with HIV, not that they are infected with HIV now or that they have or ever will have AIDS.�
�Another point which Prof. Duesberg covers in this book is that modern science has become highly politicized, and that disagreement with current scientific dogma is strongly discouraged and often punished by inability to publish in recognized scientific journals. This is one reason why Duesberg has difficulty presenting his case to the public. As a scientist with 44 years experience at a major research institution, I regret to confirm that science has indeed become politicized and dogmatic. Please read this book if you want to know the truth about AIDS and modern medical politics.� Amazon review of Dr. Peter Duesberg�s �Inventing the AIDS Virus�. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0895264706/sr=1-1/qid=1190563608/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_top/103-8968320-1007811?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books&qid=1190563608&sr =1-1#customerReviews � David R. Schryer, PhD. Research chemist. Former researcher at NASA�s Langley Research Center. Co-developer of a catalyst for use in a space-based laser that uses carbon dioxide to help generate its beam. Author of Heterogeneous Atmospheric Chemistryand Crystallite orientation in molded graphites. Co-author of Man's impact on the troposphere: lectures in tropospheric chemistry. Hampton, Virginia.
�In the old days it was required that a scientist address the possibilities of proving his hypothesis wrong as well as right. Now there�s none of that in the standard HIV-AIDS program with all its billions of dollars.� Penthouse April 1994
��But this is a misdefinition...we all need to recognize that there is no AIDS virus; there is only HIV. To date the scientific community is agreed that there is still no proven mechanism of causality linking HIV and AIDS. The New York Times� responsibility is to report accurately; it has not, and until it does its readers remain unprepared to support alternative approaches to AIDS causality, prevention and cure...�
��There are some scientists, myself included, calling for approaches to AIDS other than the near-monolithic HIV theory�goodness knows, there certainly is convincing evidence for co-factors, and for Peter Duesberg�s theory that AIDS is caused by drugs alone�In addition, AZT�is known to be cytotoxic to human cells, and in itself could be the culprit.� Yale Scientific Vol. 68, 1994
�My colleagues in molecular biology by and large do not read the AIDS literature. They�re just like everybody else who has to believe what they read in the newspapers. We all have to put our faith somewhere, otherwise we don�t have time. And that�s what scientists do. They get reassured everyday, by the newspapers, or by Science or Nature. And they look at Peter Duesberg and they say, well, Peter is a real good retrovirologist but on this one he has got to be wrong.� Continuum May/June 1996
�We need research into possible [AIDS] causes such as drug use and behaviour, not a bankrupt hypothesis.� London Sunday Times 3 April 1994
�If ever there was a rush to judgment with its predictable disastrous results, it has been the HIV-AIDS hypothesis and its aftermath.� Preface to �Infectious AIDS: Have We Been Misled�
�Twenty years ago, Charlie Thomas said that the only way the HIV/AIDS machine would be stopped, and the only way to eradicate AIDS, was to turn off ALL the money spigots.
It is not too late. �AIDS� would quickly dissolve into its geographically, and demographically distinct disease manifestations; the real crooks would retire with their ill-gotten gains; the mediocre to incompetent will, as Dizzy Gillespie put it, �like old Cadillacs, �jus be faded away by the repo company�, and the bright, basically honest guys and gals, who are trying their best in the present fascist atmosphere, can have a chance to do what they really want, namely help to alleviate suffering instead of being, unwilling but not unwitting, accomplices to its worldwide infliction.� Barnesworld blog. 2007 Apr 23. https://barnesworld.blogs.com/barnes_world/2007/04/science_sold_ou.html#comments � Dr. Richard Strohman, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley; former Director of the Health and Medical Sciences Program at UC Berkeley
�The HIV hypothesis ranks with the �bad air� theory for malaria and the �bacterial infection� theory of beriberi and pellagra [caused by nutritional deficiencies]. It is a hoax that became a scam.� London Sunday Times 3 April 1994 � Dr. Bernard Forscher, PhD, former editor of the US Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
�I have seen the constant terror, and programming to get sick and die, that people at risk for developing AIDS face. I am certain that the hypothesis that long-term drug use is the primary cause of what is now called AIDS is far more likely to prove true than the failed notion that AIDS is caused by a germ.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994
�As someone who has questioned, challenged and debunked the junk science surrounding HIV/AIDS since 1984, I must challenge the merit of debating the causes of something that has no proof for its basic assumption, namely that a CD4 cell deficiency is a valid scientific explanation for clinical disease. The Concorde study (1993) demonstrated that CD4 cells neither correlate to nor predict, either disease progression or death, in people said to have AIDS.� Red Flags Weekly, April 15, 2002
�The murderous HIV/AIDS fraud isolates, terrorizes and �treats� people for a virtual virus that is blamed for an imaginary syndrome. And let�s not forget the tens of thousands of people�who have been killed by the deadly chemical treatments they took to save themselves from this imaginary viral construct!�
�The Acquired Immune-Deficiency Syndrome is a deadly hoax � pass it on...� Red Flags Weekly, May 20, 2002
�Since the CDC changed the AIDS definition in 1993�two thirds of all the AIDS cases are people who, with no clinical illness and no AIDS indicator diseases, �have AIDS�! �these are people who have tested positive for antibodies (something that has always been known as a sign of immunity) to non-specific stress proteins (which, although treated like �whole HIV,� comprise a hodgepodge of unrelated, non-specific cellular protein fragments), are said to have CD4 cell deficiencies, and who, aside from any symptoms due to HIV/AIDS psychological terrorism, are healthy people with AIDS! I�d say that�s pretty strong clinical evidence against the basic beliefs that govern the AIDS paradigm.� Red Flags Weekly, April 15, 2002
�It was great to see your magazine shed some light on the junk science behind hiv/aids projections in India�it is, in my opinion�a case of intentional fraud�the US Centers for Disease Control has already admitted to intentionally misleading its citizens about aids in order to modify behaviour and fund the aids industries in the US�the hiv tests on which the fake statistics in India are based have been profoundly discredited and are not even proof of infection. And that many credible scientists and doctors are questioning the dogma that hiv is the cause of aids�something being ignored by major news outlets�and you have�the most important story of scientific fraud of the century.� Letter to Outlook Magazine, India, Feb. 25, 2002
�Most people really don�t care if 30 million of the poorest people on earth starve to death...The Big Lie �HIV� simplifies things. These horrific crimes are more easily ignored when these people are sentimentally written off as victims of a mythical �AIDS pandemic.��
��With AIDS however there is enough to arouse in everyone a hysteria. This mass hypnosis allows people to unconsciously act out their preconditioned roles, roles which are essential to perpetuating the Big Lie. If you�re tranced �HIV+� your part is to get sick and die; if you are a doctor your role is to test for an antibody, make healthy people sick and sick people die, and then blame an alleged �virus�; if you�re a gay AIDS activist your role is to insure that unproven treatments get into everyone�s body and that everyone wear a condom as if everyone�s at risk; if you�re an AIDS organization your role is to deliver �HIV+�s to the pharmaceutical ovens and silence anyone who questions the insanity; and if you�re not in any of these groups your role is to wear a red ribbon, a latex condom and act like you care. �AIDS� works because everyone has something to do. It all serves to keep us all from looking at what�s truly going on in the world.�
�The [AIDS] hysteria, cultural hypnosis and group fantasies serve to keep us from realizing the huge social injustices we live with everyday. How can we defend ourselves from everyday crimes against our humanity if we are constantly distracted by imaginary monsters? We must fight the real monsters that poison our air, water, food and finally our hearts, minds and souls. In order to save and live with the planet (and ourselves) we must work together to expose the life-threatening health risks that epidemics of hysteria mask.� Continuum, Winter 1997/8 � Dr. Michael Ellner, Medical hypnotherapist and hypnosis educator. President, HEAL, New York. Member of The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Complementary Therapies Working Group (1989-1992). Named Educator of the Year by the National Guild of Hypnotists (1995) and the National Federation of NeuroLinguistic Psychologists (1997). Diplomat � International Medical and Dental Hypnotherapy Association (2006). Lifetime Member � International Association of Counselors and Therapists (2007).
�The first rule is that an agent that�s going to be blamed for a disease should be able to be isolated from each and every case of the disease. That is not true with HIV and AIDS. It�s very, very difficult, in many cases of AIDS, to isolate the virus at all...The second step is that you should be able to transmit the agent�to another animal and have the disease develop in that animal. To the best of my knowledge, that has never been done with the agent we call HIV. The final step�is to remove the agent from the animal which has been infected, put it into another animal, and transmit the disease in this fashion. This, too, has not occurred with HIV.� Penthouse, 4/95
�Unfortunately, an �AIDS establishment� seems to have formed that intends to discourage challenges to the dogma on one side and often insists on following discredited ideas on the other.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994 � Dr. Roger Cunningham, PhD, microbiologist, director, Centre for Immunology, School of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo
�The causes of AIDS are not viral. I have witnessed the fatal effects that the anti-viral drugs have on the immune system. I treated patients diagnosed with HIV who were very poor. Their inability to afford the drugs precluded me from giving them AZT which is very expensive. As time went by, I began to see that the rich HIV positive patients died, while the poor ones lived and continue to do so.� Aliveandwell.org � Dr. Juan Jose Flores, MD, PhD, Professor of Medicine, La Universidad Veracruzana, Mexico
�Protecting and promoting the unproven HIV hypothesis as fact is inducing unnecessary stress, probable emotional harm, and maybe even psychological murder.� London Sunday Times 3 April 1994
�As no proper review of the AIDS literature exists by a researcher succinctly making and backing claims of HIV as the cause of AIDS, and as long as the multitude of paradigm inconsistencies are ignored with repression of genuine debate by the AIDS establishment, there will be no cure. Instead of promoting propaganda through AIDS advertisements it would be more ethical�to investigate the shame of �AIDS Science.�� digitalfilmmaker.net/Commentary2/letters/00000018.htm � Paul Lineback, MS (Counselling Psychology), former Counselor and Instructor at Southwestern Oregon Community College, Rogue Community College and Eastern Oregon University
�The damage to the immune system can be reversed. This happens when [HIV positive] people change their habits of substance abuse, eat nutritious food, involve themselves in community service, practice discipline and hygiene, receive regular counseling, family and social support. Such persons emerge stronger and healthy.� Times of India, 29 May 2001 � Arun Meitram, counsellor, Salvation Army Clinic, Mumbai, India.
�Our experience in treating HIV positive persons over the past decade shows that all the components of comprehensive psychological, emotional, physical and conventional medical treatment are very important. If a person is treated wholly, he is fine. Our patients have remained asymptomatic for up to ten years, and enjoy perfect health without anti-retroviral drugs.� Times of India, 29 May 2001 � Dr. Nagesh Shirgoppikar, AIDS specialist, Salvation Army Clinic, Mumbai, India
�When HIV was isolated from people who had the disease we call AIDS, the immediate presumption was that this was the causative agent. It became a very popular idea that this �new virus� must be causing the disease by itself because it was isolated from patients with the disease and caused damage to cells in the test tube. This ignores the likelihood that there are many other factors involved in determining how this virus causes disease.�
�The viewpoint has been so firm that HIV is the only cause and will result in disease in every patient, that anyone who challenges that is regarded as �politically incorrect.� I don�t think � as a matter of public policy � we gain by that, because it limits debate and discussion and focuses drug development on attacking the virus rather than attempting to correct the disorder of the immune system, which is central to the disease.� Penthouse April 1994
�If you firmly believe that HIV is the sole causative agent, you�re going to try your best to show that it�s true. I think, at the moment, we�re all best off if we keep our minds open. Nothing has been ruled out at this point.� Penthouse April 1994 � Dr. Arthur Gottlieb, MD, Chairperson of the Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane University School of Medicine
�One does not need to be a scientific specialist to recognise a botched research job and a scientific establishment that is distorting the facts to maximise its funding. That establishment continues to doctor statistics and misrepresent the situation to keep the public convinced that a major viral pandemic is underway when the facts are otherwise.� Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994
�If you were to go back and audit the evidence without a prejudice in favor of the reigning theory, the conclusion would be that [HIV is] harmless. A correlation does not prove causation. People who are very sick have lots of infections and foreign proteins in their blood. They may test positive for lots of things, but that doesn�t mean that those things are causing their condition.� Aids, a Second Opinion � Phillip Johnson, Senior Professor of Law, University of California at Berkeley
�It is the duty of every doctor to preserve life at any cost � and not death-curse people based on any test so they are so frightened they kill themselves. I am sad to say that these voodoo methods were practiced despite there never being any proof that the detected [HIV] antibodies are an indication of mortality in all diagnosed people. I consider it medical malpractice to push patients into dying by prophesying an early death. We are medical scientists, not prophets!� Continuum Vol. 4 No. 6
�Virologists have nothing new to offer. They keep coming up with excuses, they find constant growth and change in the virus structure, it evades, attacks, strange things, but none of them has the courage to explain properly how these things could possibly be so.� Continuum Jan/Feb 1996 � Dr. Alfred Hassig, MD, Professor in Immunology, University of Bern, former Director Swiss Red Cross blood banks. Advisor to WHO. President, International Society for Blood Transfusion. Chairman, Study Group for Nutrition and Immunity. Pioneer in hematology, immunology and stress-medicine.
�While first learning about the AIDS controversy, I read whatever I could on both sides. I have not found an instance, when both sides have been able to state their complete case, where the mainstream AIDS view has held up. On the contrary, much of the mainstream view seems to be based on bad research and fallacious reasoning.� Virusmyth.net
�The medical profession and scientific establishment have terrorized too many people with these worthless [Hiv] tests.� January 19, 2005 https://www.kimbannon.com/home/petition.php � Dr. Randall R. �Rush� Wayne, MA, Molecular Biology, Harvard University, PhD, Biochemistry, University of California
�HIV cannot be responsible for AIDS. After three years of intensive critical studies of the relevant scientific literature, as an experienced virologist and molecular biologist I came to the following surprising conclusion � there is actually no single scientifically really convincing evidence for the existence of HIV. Not even once has such a retrovirus been isolated and purified by the methods of classical virology.� Letter to S�ddeutsche Zeitung 2000 � Dr. Heinz Ludwig S�nger, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Molecular Biology and Virology and a former director of the Department of Viroid Research, Max Planck Institute for Biochemistry, Germany; Recipient of the international Robert Koch award for medical research, 1978*
�No AIDS test could ever work, because HIV has never been isolated nor even shown to exist. This is the crux of the problem facing all HIV tests. The inability to isolate a viral entity, and to characterise its constituent proteins unambiguously means that the evidence for the existence of HIV using antibodies is just arguing in a circle. Antibodies that are detected, are due to other causes. It is consequently quite illogical to claim that a positive test results from prior contact with the virus.�
�The most important and delicate task is to convince HIV positives that their test result is not a death sentence, to assuage their anxiety, and to help them understand that with appropriate treatment of any specific disease, they have a good chance to retain or regain their health. The large number of long-term positives, whose condition cannot be explained by conventional AIDS theory, as well as the phenomenon of sero-reversion (return to negative test status), provide eloquent testimony to this. HIV/AIDS researchers and health officials are herewith called upon to debate the whole subject of HIV/AIDS openly and humanely, and to recognise the mistake that immune deficiency was acquired by an infectious agent.� Continuum April/May 1995
�Duesberg, for nearly 10 years now, has steadfastly and at great personal cost, been the anchor of sanity and decency in a world driven mad by the simple-minded HIV theory. His claim to our unqualified gratitude has been his long standing and unwavering opposition to AZT (and its analogues), whose use always ends in death.� Continuum Vol. 4 No. 3
�The clarification of the question whether �HIV� exists, with the most secure method of identification available (and this would be only the isolation of complete �HI-viruses�) is a sine qua non for dismantling the mass-delusional trance called AIDS.�
�Those who too late or never receive essential knowledge may die in the throes of an �AIDS� diagnosis or commit suicide. That �HIV� has never been identified as secure biological matter is of the greatest importance and must immediately be told to every stigmatised person. No HIV � no false diagnosis AIDS � no death sentence � no false treatment � no unnecessary suffering � no needless dying, but new chances for people who for complex reasons got seriously ill, amongst them being labeled as �AIDS� cases and �HIV� positives at all, and then falling victim to medical shortsightedness based on laboratory-technical constructs.� Continuum Feb./March 1997 � Dr. Stefan Lanka, Virologist, PhD, University of Koblenz, Vice President, Science, Medicine and Human Rights, Germany
�To date, no researcher has demonstrated how HIV kills T-cells. It�s just a theory that keeps money flowing into the pharmaceutical approach to treating AIDS.� Scheff, Boston Dig
�There are at least 30 tests marketed to test for HIV. None of them are approved by the FDA to diagnose the presence or absence of HIV. Not the Elisa, not viral load, not Western Blot, not the P24 antigen test. The FDA and manufacturers clearly state that the significance of testing positive on the Elisa and Western Blot test is unknown. The manufacturers clearly state that the products that they develop are not intended to be used for diagnosing HIV. The two major problems with this are that physicians use these tests to tell people they�re infected with a deadly virus, and decisions to initiate therapy are based on these tests as well.� Scheff, Boston Dig
�In fact there is no test for HIV. It�s just an illusion�early on when we were working in collaboration with Abbott Laboratories, it was clear that there was no gold standard for HIV�no direct isolation of the virus. Nobody has ever demonstrated that HIV is present when any combination, or any one, of these tests comes up positive. None of these tests can be validated, ever. Period. Because we don�t have a way to isolate and culture HIV to prove its existence.�
�AIDS researchers admit that the tests contain at least 80 percent non-specific cellular material � they�re, at best, 20 percent effective. But in my scientific opinion, they contain no HIV at all. The medical literature lists at least 60 different conditions that can register positive on the HIV-test. These conditions include candidas, arthritis, parasites, malaria, liver conditions, alcoholism, drug abuse, flu, herpes, syphilis, other STDs and pregnancy.� Scheff, Boston Dig
�Now, it may be that there is a virus called HIV and that people who are testing positive on these tests have antibodies to that virus. It may even be that this virus is lethal. There�s no scientific evidence as such.�
��Do these more than a half-million individuals, or their families and loved ones, deserve to know that all the promised benefits of these [AIDS] drugs, which were aggressively promoted by the pharmaceutical industry, our public health institutions, and uncritical journalists, were nothing more than illusions? That the only thing real that resulted from their dedicated compliance to consuming these chemicals was the compromised quality of life and debilitating side-effects they suffered?�
��Perhaps it is possible that the [unmedicated] Ugandans in these studies are not surviving surprisingly long, but rather, the subjects in developed countries on antiretrovirals are actually dying surprisingly fast. Perhaps these antiretrovirals are not worthless, but are actually harmful to the same degree as poverty and malnutrition. To check this hypothesis, I would propose giving some of the Ugandans in the above studies access to food and water. I would predict we would see their median survival significantly surpass that of their medicated counterparts in the developed world. It�s not unethical to give Africans food is it?� Aliveandwell.org, 6/21/02
�The [African] numbers have been greatly inflated. For example, the WHO/UNAIDS says that there have been 2.2 million AIDS deaths in Uganda so far, but the Ugandan Ministry of Health records a cumulative total of only 56,000 AIDS deaths since the beginning of the epidemic.�
�As of the end of 2001, official government bodies in the developing world have managed to account for only 7 percent of the cumulative AIDS deaths that the WHO/UNAIDS claim have occurred. The Russian Federation can only account for 3 percent of the UNAIDS estimate of AIDS deaths. India has 2 percent of the UNAIDS estimate. China has only 1 percent.� Scheff, Boston Dig � Dr. Rodney Richards, PhD, Biochemist, Founding scientist for the biotech company Amgen. Collaborated with Abbott Laboratories in developing some of the first HIV tests
�Where is the Gold Standard in testing? Why are there soooooo many infections that cause false positives and yet with these positive results we recommend putting healthy people on deadly drugs which cause the very symptoms of AIDS they didn�t have before.� Kim Bannon petition, 22 Feb 2005 � Kevin Hronek, RN, BSN.
�The federal medical research establishment has laid it down that the HIV virus is the cause of AIDS. It seems virtually impossible, on Duesberg�s evidence, for HIV to do any such thing. Nevertheless, the definition of AIDS is manipulated so that HIV antibodies are always found in people diagnosed to have it.�
�Even people ignorant of virology will have no trouble following Duesberg�s exposure of the circularity of the Centers for Disease Control�s argument. He shows that the number and nature of AIDS diseases have been changed to save the doctrine�Probably the most vicious consequence of this vicious circle is the feeding of AZT and other highly toxic chemicals to persons who are HIV positive but who do not have symptoms of any AIDS disease.�
�The establishment considers that HIV, though necessary, may not be sufficient to cause AIDS. A �co-factor� may be involved. Duesberg has discovered this co-factor: it is the establishment itself. HIV, he says, causes AIDS only under the influence of the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, their corresponding agencies abroad, and interested drug companies.�
�The major lesson of Duesberg�s book is that big science cannot be trusted to police itself. Instead, the establishment has sought to suppress Duesberg by the methods of the priests of old: censorship, ostracism, excommunication, and refusal of sacraments�in this case, invitations to meetings, outlets for publication, and money for research. A more effective method would be to try to discredit him: support the research he proposes and, if it proves him wrong, expose him.� Review of �Inventing the AIDS Virus� � Dr. John Heilbron, PhD, Professor of History and History of Science and former Vice Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley
�There is ample evidence that the �HIV� proteins are cellular [not viral] proteins. Evidence also exists that AIDS patients and those at risk have�antibodies to a plethora of infectious agents which cross-react with the �HIV� proteins. In other words, whatever a positive antibody test means it cannot be considered proof for HIV infection. The fact that a positive antibody test does not mean HIV infection is accepted by the test kits manufacturers: �At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood.�� (Abbott Laboratories)
�The number and identity of antibody/protein (Western blot) bands required [for a positive HIV diagnosis] vary from continent to continent, from country to country and even between and within laboratories in the same country�This gives rise to the incongruity where, for example, an individual [HIV] positive in New York City on the CDC criteria would not be positive in Sydney, Australia. Or an Australian positive with p41, p32, p24 and p18 bands would not be positive in Africa. Or an African positive with a p41 and p120 band would not be positive in Australia, parts of the US or Europe�This means that �different international regulatory bodies� or �local policies,� and not the presumed pathogen determine patterns of antibody reactivity said to prove a retroviral infection.�
��It�s the same virus and the same test. Who would have ever thought travel or emigration could cure HIV infection? The HIV antibody test is the only test in the history of medicine whose results have one meaning in one country or laboratory and another in another country or laboratory. What is even more extraordinary is that this fact does not seem to worry the HIV experts.� BMJ RR, 26 June 2003
�There is evidence that the decrease of T4 cells in blood is not due to their destruction by HIV, and that decrease in T4 cells is not correlated with disease progression. In fact, evidence exists which shows that �low numbers of T4 cells was the highest risk factor for HIV infection,� that is, decrease in T4 cells is the cause and not the effect of �HIV seroconversion.��
�As early as 1985, Montagnier knew that the immune deficiency�was not caused by HIV: �This [AID] syndrome occurs in a minority of infected persons, who generally have in common a past of antigenic stimulation and of immune depression before [HIV] infection.��
��In conclusion, a decrease in T4 cells is neither necessary nor sufficient for disease to develop. This finding totally contradicts the HIV theory of AIDS�and by itself is sufficient for one to question the HIV theory.�
�The main prediction of the HIV theory was that AIDS would rapidly spread throughout the heterosexual population. One of the first scientists to publish data that this could not be the case was Robert Gallo. In 1984, he wrote: �Of eight different sex acts, seropositivity correlated only with receptive anal intercourse.� In 1986 Gallo wrote: �Data from this and previous studies have shown that receptive rectal intercourse, for example, is an important risk factor for [HIV] infection...We found no evidence that other forms of sexual activity contributed to the risk.� This was confirmed in many other studies.�
�If a hypothesis cannot account for the phenomena for which it was put forward, and if its predictions are not fulfilled, then scientists have no choice but to reappraise it.� Commentary on The Durban Declaration, 2000; British Medical Journal RR, 19 June 2003 � Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, Nuclear Physicist, Department of Medical Engineering and Physics, Royal Perth Hospital, University of Western Australia � Valendar F. Turner, MD, Department of Emergency Medicine: Royal Perth Hospital. � John M. Papadimitriou, MD, PhD, Professor of Pathology: Royal Perth Hospital. � David Causer, PhD, Department of Medical Physics: Royal Perth Hospital. � Barry Page, MSc, Department of Medical Physics: Royal Perth Hospital � Dr. Helman Alfonso, MD, Director of Research, Universidad Metropolitana Barranquilla, Colombia; author, in Spanish, The Great Fiasco: AIDS Is Not Caused by HIV.
�All HIV tests I know, screening, searching-tests and confirming-tests, cannot eliminate the influence of other causal agents. It is not possible to use these tests alone.�
�When teaching biology and oral medicine I had to teach my students to make plausible deductions. In my own laboratory during the time as head of a Department of Periodontology my students could learn how unspecific these tests could be. So why should I trust those tests to be acceptable for the detection or screening of HIV? This is the reason why I have never been able to believe HIV to be the only cause of the AIDS-syndromes.�
�History shows us that most diseases are multi-causal in origin. Mono-causality is an over-simplification.� Interview, Virusmyth, Oct. 2001 � Dr. Heinz Spranger, PhD, DDM. German Nosologist and Semiotist, and Practitioner in Periodontology and Oral Medicine. Former founder and Dean of the Faculty of Oral Medicine at the University Witten/Herdecke, former head of the Department of Periodontology and Oral Medicine, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main. Recipient of the German Ribbon of the Order of the Distinguished Service Cross for his humanitarian scientific efforts
�There are not any reasons to consider HIV-seropositivity as a reliable marker of a deadly disease. The main danger of HIV-seropositivity is of iatrogenic [caused by medicine or doctors] nature: such individuals are at high risk of being administered abnormally severe and prolonged �prophylactic� treatment (antibiotics, antiretrovirals).�
�This iatrogenic effect is a direct consequence of the uncritical acceptance of the HIV-causes-AIDS theory. Critical reevaluation of the studies carried out in Africa demonstrates that the results support �HIV-is-only-a-marker� hypotheses, and contradict the HIV-causes-AIDS one, irrespective to the actual causes of HIV-seropositivity. Even if to prove rigorously that HIV exists as an exogenous transmissible agent (this has never been done) and that HIV-seropositivity is caused by HIV-infection, it still cannot prove that HIV is the cause of AIDS.�
�Correlation between HIV-infection and AIDS-defining diseases is equally explainable by the �HIV-is-a-marker� hypotheses, which hold that HIV is a benign passenger virus and can easily infect only individuals with some deviations from normal health status, thus, being only a marker of such deviations. The main problem with the official HIV-causes-AIDS theory is that it has never been shown that �HIV-proteins� are related to a virus.�
�AIDS diagnosis itself causes drastic increase in mortality. At least two factors are likely to be responsible for this excessive mortality. First, severe side effects of the medication AIDS patients are usually put on. Second, detrimental psycho-physiological effect of severe and permanent stress resulted from the very information about diagnosis of AIDS.� Virusmyth, Oct. 1996, April, 1998
�Unfortunately, the general acceptance of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis and intensive propaganda of this view as the ultimate truth by �the AIDS establishment� diverts the attention of the scientific community�and research funds�from the real path to reveal the causes of AIDS and reduce the number of its victims.� Rethinking AIDS Jan/Feb 1994 � Dr. Vladimir Koliadin, PhD, Senior Research Scientist, State Aerospace University, Kharkov, Ukraine
�At the start of my heresy is the fact I don�t believe the HIV hypothesis very likely to be true. Once you go about reading the actual biochemistry and immunology about HIV and AIDS, it is only by taking a quite gigantic leap-of-faith that you can get to the notion that AIDS is caused by HIV. That so many very intelligent scientists are willing so thoroughly to suspend disbelief on this, basically to assume a conclusion in the absence of any very good evidence, is a very interesting case study in a politicized philosophy of science.�
�There is a bias of reductionism and mono-causalism in science which makes the one-virus/one-disease model very appealing, even where the evidence doesn�t support it. Beyond that, the �war on cancer� of the 1970�s promoted a more limited bias towards explaining disease with viruses, and with retroviruses in particular.�
�Whenever I have mentioned writing this, or related papers, to friends and colleagues on the Left, the very first reaction is inevitably a sort of gasp, followed by an exasperated warning that I better be careful to emphasize the importance of �safe-sex.� For speaking before this group of leftist academics, their implicit premise remains that, lest I admonish you all explicitly on the virtues of condoms�and perhaps of monogamy�you will all rush from this room during my lecture, and **** around so furiously as forthwith to contract AIDS (or perhaps lack even the discretion of leaving the room prior to such activity). The magical powers attributed to a simple lack of obedience to the idol of safe-sex is quite remarkable.�
�I had a well-known leftist academic angrily insist he could not serve on my dissertation committee because I might fail to warn my students staunchly enough against unsafe-sex. A friend of mine has been fired from a post-doc position at Princeton, by a nominal leftist with a lot of federal money, for essentially the same reason.�
�What we are doing in giving this �safe� advice is granting the legitimacy of our students� irrational fears because of their sexual contents. Thereby we fail to critique the systematic regulation of sexuality in the maintenance of a repressive social order. AIDS has succeeded in shifting the left-wing discourse of sexuality away from one of liberation, freedom and resistance, to one of responsibility, danger and obligation � concepts much more at home with a right-wing scheme of social control, xenophobia and authoritarianism than with anything on the Left�In our guts we feel we need give no heed to the corrupt and reactionary pronouncements of the politicians and priests; but still, an inner voice rejoins, we must believe the scientists! Somehow science has served in dismantling the language of liberation in the Left more than any other institutions possibly could have.� Sex Wars: The New Left�s Aids-Related Scientism, Rethinking Marxism Spring 1996/1997 � Dr. David Mertz, PhD, Philosopher of Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
�Recently, I was asked to testify as an expert witness in a case involving two foster children. These two sisters had the unfortunate luck to have been born to an HIV positive mother, and were themselves testing HIV positive.
�For most of the two years that they were with their foster parents, they were given AZT. For most of these two years, they were ill. The parents began to question the efficacy of the drug, did lots of research, and ultimately came to believe that it was the drug, not the HIV status, that was making the children sick. They took them off the drug; the children starting thriving, looking and feeling great.
�The charity that had placed the children found out the children were not being given the drug, and the children were immediately, without forewarning or preparation, removed from the house. The case that I was testifying at had to do with visitation rights. My position was unequivocal. The children should be allowed to see the only parents they had even known.
�I was on the stand for two hours and I was grilled as though I were a hostile witness defending criminals. The judge decided that it was not in the best interest of the children to have supervised visits with their parents. There are lots of other similar cases.
�In spite of the research that documents that most HIV positive infants born to HIV positive mothers (thank goodness they are born HIV positive: it means their natural immunity has recognized the virus and is mounting a defense) lose their HIV positive status within 18 months of birth; in spite of the research that documents that children given AZT are 3 times more likely to develop AIDS or die by 18 months than those who don�t take AZT (because AZT destroys the body�s ability to fight on its own); in spite of research that documents many other findings calling into question the actual safety (forget about the efficacy) of AZT, in spite of all this, mothers who are refusing to give their children AZT are losing their children.
�We need to pay attention to these children because without help, without a more enlightened position on AIDS, the nature of what it means to be HIV positive (not much at all actually, not much different than you or I if they take care of themselves), and without the ending of the policy of grabbing these children away from their mothers and the policy of force-feeding AZT to these children, they will have no destiny to change. They will have no destiny at all.� Acceptance Speech for the Changing Destiny Award from the Help a Mother, Save a Child Foundation, 2002 � Jane Goldberg, PhD. Instructor in Psychology, City University of New York, New School for Social Research Graduate Faculty, Research Associate, Department of Medical Oncology, Kingsbrook Jewish Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, Consultant to Help a Mother, Save a Child, Managing Editor: Modern Psychoanalysis
�In one of my recent lectures entitled �HIV/AIDS Orthodoxy � A Bufoonery of False Science or Unholy Conspiracy,� delivered as a guest lecturer at The Staff Club of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria, the following remark was made by a supporter of the orthodoxy (a Professor of Pharmaceutical Microbiology!): �Koch�s Postulate is obsolete! Infectious agents need no longer pass the test of objective scrutiny of the Koch�s postulate!!� I have never in my life heard of any such thing.� Letter to Philip Johnson, Professor of Law at UC Berkeley
�It is also hoped that your network will afford itself the benefit of educating the people about other views (with sound scientific backing) regarding this hoax called the HIV/AIDS connection, and also how these �dissident� views are beginning to expose the HIV/AIDS orthodoxy. It is hoped that at the end of the current studies going on, the dissidents would have been vindicated and many condemned to death would realise that they aren�t going to die after all. By then science would have experienced a Velvet revolution.� Letter to Dr. Adejuyigbe
�It is indeed most unscientific and unacademic to fold our hands and pretend to be blind to the need to scrutinize the unscientific dogmas churned out by the AIDS orthodoxy.� � Dr. Anthony I. Okoh, PhD, Lecturer, Department Of Microbiology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
�I believe that HIV does not exist, I believe that there are several factors that break down the immune system. For over twenty years of fighting the AIDS establishment in Nigeria I have come to realise that greed and corruption at the highest level even in government propels all of them. That the media unwittingly have connived with them to terrorize the people. I give out fifty thousand dollars to any wonderful virologist who will prove the existence of HIV according to the original papers by Dr. Gallo and Professor Luc Montagnier.� Virusmyth comment � Paul Olisa Adaka Ojeih, PhD, MD. Medical Director, Iris Medical Foundation, Lagos, Nigeria, author, Man and Diseases,AIDS: The Untold Truth and Cure, and AIDS: The Plague That Never Existed.
�The HIV-AIDS hypothesis remains just that � a hypothesis. Many experts� predictions turned out to be false. For example, contrary to the prediction that AIDS would rapidly spread into the heterosexual population, the disease in the United States is still restricted to 85 percent males. Yet HIV positives are found with equal frequency in healthy male and female Army recruits. This discrepancy doesn�t support the hypothesis that AIDS is caused by HIV.�
�AIDS drugs have been credited for the reduction in AIDS deaths. But there is no scientific evidence that these toxic drugs prolong life. A study in Uganda shows that the time between becoming HIV-positive and the time of death is identical to that in the United States. The Uganda group received no AIDS drugs, while the U.S. group did. Since most people in the Uganda study were malnourished and multiply infected, doesn�t that suggest that antiretroviral drugs reduce life expectancy? Malnutrition is the most common cause of immune deficiency.�
�I thought the day would never arrive when a reputed medical journal finally allows a debate of this hot topic. After 100 billion dollars spent over a 20-year period on a poorly supported hypothesis and nothing to show for it, it is about time. Perhaps it will make some physicians think before they prescribe deadly drugs to treat a phantom virus.�
�Unfortunately, the government suppresses alternative explanations of AIDS. This dogmatic approach certainly will lead to a medical disaster.�
�The diagnosis of being HIV-positive has cost too many lives. Let�s continue this debate and finally apply sound scientific method which is so sorely needed.� Miami Herald, July 30, 2002 � Dr. Rudolf Werner, PhD, Professor of Biochemistry, University of Miami School of Medicine
�It does seem to be the time to deal with a rally against the CDC for all of its false information and propaganda. Even more so it seems that it is time to really get after the FDA for approving life threatening drugs and food substance to satisfy the greed of the pharmaceutical industry.� Posting, 17 May 1996 www.aidsinfobbs.org/articles/quilty/q07/3372
�On December 1, �World Aids Day,� the news media tried to outdo each other with reports which, as usual, tended to increase our fear, but not our knowledge, of the dreaded disease. We heard that there are more cases than we should have expected, that the people are sicker than before, that there may be some minor help from the �cocktail� multi-drug medication and that the incubation period for the disease is again lengthened, now to ten to eleven years.
�But there are serious problems with this scenario. As we mentioned in February, 1994, a minority of doctors at that time were unconvinced that HIV...caused AIDS, because there was no acceptable scientific proof. There still isn�t. Robert Koch, a famous German bacteriologist, formulated a system of four postulates for establishing causation of disease. These postulates have not been met in the case of AIDS. There remains only a theory that HIV, along with other risk factors, is the cause of AIDS. But there is no proof that HIV causes AIDS, nor in fact, that it causes any disease.
�The compelling logic presented by these skeptics is that if HIV caused AIDS, or even if HIV were just a necessary part of the cause, every case of AIDS would have to test positive for HIV. But this is not the case. The so-called AIDS epidemic in Africa has over 70% of the patients with HIV negative blood (see Lancet, October, 1992, for a related study). The cause of their epidemics can be more plausibly pinpointed as starvation and other compromises to their immune systems.
�When the press says millions in a country are dying of AIDS, this is only an estimate of the number of people that are HIV positive. There is ample evidence that people with HIV positive blood can lead long and productive lives as long as they eat well, exercise regularly, do not take drugs, excess alcohol or tobacco products.
�Skeptics about the HIV-AIDS connections implicate the role of AZT, an extremely toxic drug originally given indiscriminately to all �AIDS� patients. Its documented side effects are exactly the same as the symptoms of full-blown AIDS. The simple reason behind the success of newer therapies may be the reduction or elimination of this toxic drug in the treatment.� https://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1998/3/1998-3-17.shtml � Devananda Tandavan, MD, Nuclear Physician and Hospital Staff President, Chicago, Illinois
�Various degrees of immune impairment have been found among HIV-negative individuals at high risk for AIDS; namely, HIV-negative hemophiliacs, HIV-negative homosexual and bisexual males, HIV-negative intravenous drug users and their infants, and HIV-negative heterosexuals of developing countries. These findings strongly suggest that the subjects� immune impairment is a result of factors other than HIV infection.� Journal of the InterAmerican Medical and Health Assn., Jan-April 1992 � Dr. Maurizio Luca-Moretti, MD, PhD, president, Inter American Medical and Health Association
�As a physician, I am appalled and embarrassed that the free flow of scientific inquiry and dissent has been routinely suppressed and dismissed on the HIV/AIDS issue. I am appalled that a whole generation of young people has been scared to death that �sex kills.� I am appalled that people are getting drugs (AZT, etc) that are not only not helping them but harming or even killing them. I am appalled that completely healthy people have committed suicide on learning that they are �HIV positive,� when the test is, of course non-specific and meaningless. I am saddened and angered that some people are making a lot of money from the suffering of others (pharmaceutical companies especially).�
�I am proud to be a part of this group. I have personally read much of the scientific literature on this subject so I am convinced that this is clearly one of the greatest, if not the greatest medical cover-up of the 20th century�hopefully not the 21st as well...�
�Although I�ve tried to get newspapers and journals to publish my letters on this subject, the only ones that did were an obscure alternative lifestyle magazine and the Townsend Letter for Doctors (April, 1995) which has a larger circulation.�
�My local (New York State at the time) NPR station did do a program on the issue about 5 years ago but it was so watered down it was worthless. The reporter was willing to interview Dr. Duesberg at my suggestion but was quashed by the powers that be at the station (and possibly in the community as well).� Comment to Virusmyth.net
�I have been all over Africa for almost 30 years and when I first heard there was a new sexually transmitted disease epidemic I was alarmed and began looking for what the television said was everywhere. All I ever saw was more and more of the same diseases we saw in 1975, and it was obvious the increase was because of the worsening living conditions, and the pennies instead of dollars governments were spending on health care. Sure, I have seen TB wards at hospitals and lots of misery, but nobody except the media and the people living off AIDS money ever called that AIDS. And isn�t it true that except for South Africa no country uses an �HIV test� before it names some old disease AIDS? And what�s all this about an epidemic? Even before you showed me the real numbers, I knew nothing had happened in the United States after 20 years of �sexually-transmitted� HIV. And as far as I remember, AIDS was discovered here in the �most sex and number one-loving country in the world�. And then they decided it must have come from Africa.
President Mbeki is the only African leader who has said this kind of stuff. Look what the media did to him. But Mbeki was reelected by a 70% majority, and South Africa has the fastest growing economy on the continent. Never mind. The CDC, and Bill Gates and the WHO know the president is a �fool�, and the �real� truth is the country is being destroyed by AIDS!�
�Sometimes a very mixed bag of interests can become united for different reasons. I think that is what happened with the push to sell AIDS as a new, sexually transmitted disease that started in Africa and was the biggest health threat to the continent. All the people with the �good intentions� of �keeping poor, uncivilized, sex-crazed Africans from killing themselves (again)� could be comfortably in bed with sensationalist, racist media, ITT�s medical division, corrupt politicians and a WHO you told me was so broke it had no money for a malaria vaccine� Bialy H. Running in Circles: Lee Evans Interview. 2006 Feb. https://www.rethinkaids.info/body.cfm?id=85 � Dr. George Milowe, MD, Melrose-Wakefield Hospital, Malden, Massachusetts
�[Hiv/Aids] would not be the first time that a diagnosis was conveniently built around a set of symptoms for the sake of extracting huge sums of money from otherwise healthy patients.� January 19, 2005 https://www.kimbannon.com/home/petition.php � David Epstein, D.O., Osteopathic Physician, Atlanta, Georgia
�My medical studies led me to believe that AIDS was devastating [Africa] and the people who showed me the situation here reinforced this belief. I jumped into this, and made others believe it. And now I know it was not true. But I know many more things that were not true. Nothing was true.�
�When you are here, and you have to witness the reality of what happens in the field, you cannot agree with any of the statements they are making in Europe about AIDS in Africa. We discovered we were in a full-blown lie about AIDS.�
�When you listen to the people, you find they had been shocked by some deaths where the effects on the body were very visual, with fungus infections and skin rashes. But these can be secondary effects of antibiotics, and the people who died with these conditions had all been treated before for conditions such as bronchitis. Nothing is sure; everything is just wind.�
�The parents expatriate themselves a lot. They move away from the region, sending a little money, returning little or never, but still have many children in the village. They are outwardly orphans, but raised by the grandmother or grandfather�it has nothing to do with AIDS�You come as a European and ask: �Who has no mother or father?� They produce all these children, even though they have a mother or father in another place.�
�We have been shown false orphans since the beginning�children who have parents who never died, but who will not show up any more�Families just bring them as orphans, and if you ask how the parents died they will say AIDS. It is fashionable nowadays to say that, because it brings money and support.�
�If you say your father has died in a car accident it is bad luck, but if he has died from AIDS there is an agency to help you. The local people have seen so many agencies coming�that they want to join this group of victims. Everybody claims to be a victim of AIDS nowadays. And local people working for AIDS agencies have become rich. They have built homes in Dar es Salaam, they have their motorbikes; they have benefited a lot.�
�Not one such [African village abandoned because of AIDS] can be witnessed�The houses that were empty were closed because they were the second or third homes of someone in Dar es Salaam. I learned this later.�
�This is the first time in Africa that a village has volunteered as a whole to be tested for a deathful disease. That everybody has got his results and that the truth has been five times lower than the figures given by the World Health Organisation of the AIDS control programmes.�
��You have no right to call any of these deaths AIDS. I can�t tell you of a single child I have followed who has died of a so-called AIDS-related illness.�
�A 65-year-old who tested HIV-positive had been getting sick, suffering stomach troubles and losing weight. I explained to him that HIV and AIDS were very different things, that we could not really make a link between them. The other day I heard that the fellow is not sick any more. He doesn�t believe he is going to get AIDS. He has regained four kilos and is doing very well. This type of resuscitation is very common in our programme�Give us food, water and education and you can forget about AZT.�
�It is very easy to �do good� in Africa. It is so disorganised that the one who is doing the good is also the one reporting the good he is doing. So it is a perfect field for charity�the fake charity which is 99% of the charity in Africa�charity which benefits the benefactors.�
�The world has been brainwashed about AIDS. It has become a disease in itself, without the necessity of having sick people any more. You don�t need AIDS patients to have an AIDS epidemic nowadays, because what is wrong doesn�t need to be proved. Nobody checks; AIDS exists by itself. We came here to help orphans of AIDS. Now we are facing a situation where there are no orphans and no AIDS...It is good to know that this epidemic which was going to wipe out Africa is just a big bubble of soap.�
�We are in the heart of AIDS country. You are talking to people who �discovered� AIDS here, and who now say it is a lie. We expect to have to pay for what we say. It will be the price of truth.� Sunday Times, London, 3 October 1993 � Philippe Krynen, Former director, Partage Tanzania, French Aids charity
�Two months of travels in Africa confirmed what I had learned from the whistleblowers. Saw lots of luxury European cars being driven by local functionaries who �worked with AIDS organizations� which was a scandalous waste of resources for such a needy continent.� Comment while signing the VirusMyth.net petition. � Elizabeth Noble, Founder, Maternal and Child Health Center and Cambridge Physical Therapy, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Author of 8 books including Essential Exercises for the Childbearing Year and Having Your Baby by Donor Insemination. Member, editorial board, International Journal of Pre- and Perinatal Psychology and Medicine. Founder, Women�s Health Section of American Physical Therapy Association.
�In the clutch of �AIDS,� fear is so predominant that an HIV-test alone, regardless of its result, can lead to a drop of the T4-lymphocytes. The narrow-minded monocausal virus-hypothesis of �AIDS� must be overcome in favor of a broader view which takes into consideration the complex individual personality of the patient in his/her relation to the world and environment.� Amsterdam Conference, �AIDS: A Different View,� 14-16 May, 1992 � Dr. Hansueli Albonico, MD, Langnau, Switzerland
�The scientific data do not support the view that what is being called AIDS in Africa has a viral cause. The World Health Organization defines an AIDS case in Africa as a combination of fever, persistent cough, diarrhea and a 10-percent loss of body weight in two months. No HIV test is needed. It is impossible to distinguish these common symptoms � all of which I�ve had while working in Somalia � from those of malaria, tuberculosis or the indigenous diseases of impoverished lands.�
�By contrast, in North America and Europe, AIDS is defined as 30-odd diseases in the presence of HIV (as shown by a positive HIV test). The lack of any requirement for such a test in Africa means that, in practice, many traditional African diseases can be and are reclassified as AIDS. Since 1994, tuberculosis itself has been considered an AIDS-indicator disease in Africa. Dressed up as HIV/AIDS, a variety of old sicknesses have been reclassified.�
�The scandal is that long-standing ailments that are largely the product of poverty are being blamed on a sexually transmitted virus. With missionary-like zeal, but without evidence, condom manufacturers and AIDS fund-raisers attribute those symptoms to an �African sexual culture.� Rev. Eugene Rivers of Boston has launched a crusade to change African sexual practices � a crusade reminiscent of Victorian voyeurs whose racist constructs equated black people with sexual promiscuity.�
�The problem is that dysentery and malaria do not yield headlines or fatten public-health budgets. �Plagues� and infectious diseases do. This means that those who question AIDS in Africa put their own funding at risk. I saw this at first-hand when I visited Swaziland in mid-December at the invitation of their HIV/AIDS Crisis Management Committee. I was driven from the airport to the hotel in a late model 4-wheel drive vehicle. It had been donated by UNICEF and was covered with AIDS posters urging Swazis to �use a condom, save a life.��
�After my presentation, an attorney named Teresa Mlangeni acknowledged that she could easily see how malnutrition, tuberculosis, malaria and other parasitic infections � not sexual behaviour � were making her fellow Swazis ill. But other committee members confided that if they voiced public doubts, they risked losing their international funding. And I realized that the vested interests of the international AIDS orthodoxy would discourage further inquiries.�
�Traditional public-health approaches, clean water and improved sanitation above all can tackle the underlying health problems in Africa. They may not be sexy, but they will save lives. And they will surely stop terrorizing an entire continent.� Canada Globe and Mail, March 14, 2000
�If you don�t believe [HIV=AIDS], you�re a heretic. So the best way to deal with the dissidents is to ignore them, silence them and wreck their careers.� Gadfly Magazine June 11, 2001
�You�re looking at what I think is going to turn out to be one of the great frauds of the late 20th century.� Fudged Facts On Aids, Now Magazine, Toronto, 9-15 March 2000 � Dr. Charles L. Geshekter, PhD, three-time Fulbright scholar. Professor of African History, California State University, Chico. Former chair of the History of Science, Pacific Division, of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences. He has served as an adviser to the U.S. State Department and several African governments
�I am one of those that never believed in this [HIV=AIDS] hypothesis. I could not express myself as I was the only one with that opinion in my environment. I would like to know the truth!� https://www.virusmyth.net � Prof. B. M. Hegde, MD, FRCP(London), FRCP(Edinburgh), FRCP(Glasgow), FRCPI(Dublin), FACC, FAMS. Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of the Science of Healing Outcomes, Chairman, State Health Society�s Expert Committee, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. Visiting Prof. of Cardiology, The Middlesex Hospital Medical School, University of London, Affiliate Prof. of Human Health, Northern Colorado University. Visiting Prof., Indian Institute of Advanced Studies, Shimla. Retiredd Vice Chancellor, Manipal University. Mangalore, India.
�Virus isolation is necessary to prove virus infection. Retrovirologists have laid down a set of criteria to distinguish spurious from genuine retroviruses. HIV does not fulfil these criteria, but AIDS researchers accept PCR (polymerase chain reaction � a technique for making a large number of copies of a small fragment of genetic material) tests as sufficient proof. If traditional retrovirology is right and AIDS research is wrong, all current AIDS researches are fundamentally flawed.�
��This inevitably begs the question as to how HIV is being so easily transmitted in Africa when it is so difficult in northern California. Facilitation by other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) has been proposed, a nonsense as the incidence of STDs in Africa is lower than HIV positivity � the facilitated cannot be more prevalent than the facilitator � and a study from Uganda has found that reducing the incidence of STD did not reduce the rate of conversion from HIV negative to positive.� �Welcome to the mad world of AIDS research,� New African, 1999
�If many thousands of European men failed to get AIDS after receiving chimpanzee transplants, how have Africans succeeded? Do they even hunt chimpanzees? No evidence has even been presented that they do. Do they carry syringes and needles with them and, after killing the chimpanzee extract some chimpanzee blood (difficult, but even more difficult from the living) and inject themselves with it? Have sex with the poor dead creature (7,000 times assuming a male hunter and female chimp)? Eat the raw flesh? At every step the hypothesis that monkey viruses infected Africans and caused the AIDS epidemic is so improbable as to be realistically impossible. Unfortunately in the mad world of AIDS research, this passes as science.� Continuum, Summer, 1999 � Dr. Rosalind Harrison, Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, consultant opthalmic surgeon for the National Health Service, UK
�Over a period of three years, in the late 1980�s, I was an eyewitness to gross irregularities and scientific misconduct by researchers involved in the early clinical trials of AZT. Tragically, AZT was first approved for widespread use based on the outcome of these scientifically inconclusive studies. And unfortunately, all other �anti-HIV� drugs since that time have been approved based on the same, flawed model.� Virusmyth.net, 2000
�AZT is a poison. AZT commonly causes miscarriages and severe birth defects. AZT is a highly toxic chemotherapy which interrupts DNA synthesis and destroys the immune system. In fact, AZT is a tragedy which I believe has led to tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, primarily in wealthier countries.�
�AZT is part of the problem, not the solution. I do not want to see this tragedy and anguish imported into Africa and other developing areas of the world.� � Lynn Fall (n�e Gannett), Former data manager, phase III clinical trials of AZT (1987-1990)
�Even accepting [HIV�s] etiology in the disease, only 36% of the AIDS patients were seropositive for the virus in the initial [Gallo, et al] studies. Later, numerous scientific publications have called attention to the existence of a great number of patients with signs and symptoms of AIDS, but totally seronegative�The possibility of some cofactors being the real causes behind a large number of entities considered to be AIDS�among others, regardless of their retroviral serological state, is becoming more and more likely and scientifically plausible.�
��In some countries HIV has been associated with diarrhea, in others with wasting syndrome, in others with dementia and in others with Kaposi�s Sarcoma, among many other diseases that appear differently and according to the studied country, making HIV a geographically selective virus.�
�These facts and incongruities, added to�the existence of more than 70 clinical and laboratory situations in which the HIV tests produce false positives, including the Trypanosoma cruzi infection recently detected by our group, or, worse still, the nonisolation to date of the same HIV, after almost 20 years of investigation�makes it an urgent necessity to analyze other concepts and to explore other etiologies different from the viral one, with the purpose of helping to clarify, a little more, these intricate problems of public health�and all those enigmatic and amazing germs that today already belong to the new family of HiV, the Human Imagination Viruses.� [Translated from Spanish] Retrovirus, micotoxinas, immunosupresi�n y neurodegeneraci�n. 2002, Revista De Neurolog�a � Dr. Fidias E. Le�n-Sarmiento, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Internal Medicine and Basic Sciences, Universidad Industrial de Santander, Bucaramanga, Colombia, Senior Research Fellow, National Institutes of Health, Washington DC. � Marta Carpintero de Jimeno, MSc, Laboratorio Qu�mico de Monitoreo Ambiental (LAQMA). Bogot�, Colombia
�Time and again those of us who are �AIDS dissidents� have been dismayed and disgusted by the falsehoods, distortions, and omissions in AIDS coverage�I maintain further that the salient characteristics of war coverage are also those of AIDS coverage, namely: censorship (self-imposed, official, and in-between), hysteria, the use of black propaganda, the fabrication of �atrocity stories,� and garden variety incompetence.� New York Native 12 August 1991
�Ryan White died on 8 April 1990. The causes of his death and the nature of his illness were the targets of censorship�Ryan did not die of �AIDS� but rather of hemophilia aggravated by Factor VIII concentrate and AZT poisoning. Craig Schoonmaker, founder of Homosexuals Intransigent, told me he had heard over the radio and on television that Ryan White had been admitted to the hospital with uncontrolled internal bleeding. We followed the print media closely for several days, but could not find a single mention of bleeding. Then Ryan died, and not a single reference to bleeding could be found in the Associated Press, New York Times, or Washington Post obituaries. However, the Times story contained this curious passage: �Ryan, a hemophiliac who contracted the virus through a blood transfusion, died of complications of AIDS in Riley Hospital for Children, said Dr. Martin Kleiman, the youth�s physician. He would not elaborate.�
�What this indicates is that censors intervened to prevent the print media and Ryan�s doctor from mentioning bleeding. Bryan Ellison�contacted the Hemophilia Foundation of Indiana. The people there knew Ryan White very well, and confirmed that hemophilia itself was his major health problem and the cause of his death.�
�I have talked to a number of people, and have heard of many more, who looked healthy, felt healthy, and were leading active and productive lives�and were told by their doctors that they ought to be sick on the basis of their T-cell counts or their HIV status. It is appalling that those who ought to be healers are instead programming healthy people to get sick. A malign form of voodoo is being practiced in this country by the priests of Modern Medicine.�
�The HIV-antibody tests are not only highly inaccurate, but biased as well. A man in California went to a clinic, identified himself as gay, and took the HlV-antibody test; results: positive. Then he went to another clinic, identified himself as a heterosexual, and took the same test; results: negative.�
�The AIDS epidemic is an epidemic of lies, through which hundreds of thousands of people have died and are dying unnecessarily, billions of dollars have gone down the drain, the Public Health Service has disgraced itself, and Science has plunged into whoredom.� �The AIDS War,� 1993 � John Lauritsen, Journalist, Harvard-educated survey research analyst. Author of the books The AIDS War; Propaganda, Profiteering and Genocide From the Medical-Industrial Complex and Poison by Prescription; The AZT Story
�I just tested positive 4 months ago. Being gay and having been around from the start of the AIDS hysteria, I thought I knew something about the syndrome and treatment. Boy, was I wrong! I have learned so much about the myths associated with HIV and AIDS over the last month. I was about to (reluctantly) start the drugs they said I needed due to my initial low CD4 count and high viral load. I am so glad I was fortunate enough to educate myself on this subject. I now feel totally comfortable in choosing not to use the toxic drugs that are supposed to control HIV. I am completely ignoring the HIV side of things and concentrating on building my immune system back up, naturally. I actually have not had a cold or the flu in 2 years and run 4 miles, 3-4 times a week. I have been doing triathlons every year since 1984 and don�t intend to stop now! I am getting involved with local organizations that support this educated view and I�ll do everything in my power to educate as many of my friends, peers, and people in my community as I can. Education is Power!� https://www.virusmyth.net � Roger Ditrick, Biologist, San Diego, CA
�Before Ryan White there was me. Same doctors, same hospital� [They told me to] take AZT... I said no to the doctors and I am alive. I have been black-balled by the press which made a hero out of White.�
�Some people have said that the virus does exist but it�s a harmless one. You�ll test positive for it, but it won�t cause any harm. I�m inclined to believe that. Because I�m not sick. It hasn�t hurt me, and it hasn�t hurt my [HIV+] brothers, and it hasn�t hurt my [HIV+] uncles. And it hasn�t hurt their kids, and it hasn�t hurt their wives.�
�And by the way, I smoke and drink... It�s not like I�m a health nut, or I take any extraordinary measures to protect my health.� Valley Advocate, August 6, 1998 � Robert Bryant, Hemophiliac (from a family of hemophiliacs), Indiana. HIV+ for 20 years
�I do not believe that there is a virus killing CD4 cells. I think that possibility was always a long-shot, but now with further research showing that nearly any psychological or physical stress causes lowered CD4 counts, combined with the difficulty finding a mechanism for HIV to do it, I think the idea is fairly ridiculous.�
�It is very common for people who are diagnosed �HIV-positive� to test negative years later, especially if they turn their lives around and stop whatever practice is leading to a hyperstimulated immune system.� Letter to Virusmyth, 2002
�The message emanated from that [1984 Gallo] press conference and quickly swept the country. It went something like this:
�You might look healthy now, but if you test positive on the HIV antibody test, your immune system is already beginning to crumble�as the virus in you eats away at your life force. You will be �infected,� and there is no way to�become uninfected��You must take great care not to infect others�You are�an �untouchable.� You cannot under any circumstances engage in sexual intercourse unless people are protected from you�you cannot even breastfeed your own children since you might also infect them. A slow, painful, inexorable decline, and an agonizing loss of dignity awaits you, and only with death will the curse be lifted.�
�When such a curse is laid, what is the risk of a self-fulfilling prophecy? �the risk is significant...Virtually every claim ever made about HIV has been repeatedly contradicted. Usually, these contradictions have not been countered by other studies�Instead, the authors�either minimize their findings, or ask pointed questions that gather dust in medical libraries around the world.�
��Many of the symptoms of AIDS are either directly caused, or made much worse, by the severe, chronic psychological stress, social isolation, and negative beliefs created by the diagnosis.�
�The [HIV] diagnosis itself can bring about a self-fulfilling prophecy because of the powerful negative beliefs it creates. Stress, social isolation, and negative beliefs can create the same type of immunodeficiency that is commonly blamed on HIV.�
�Being diagnosed HIV-positive is perhaps one of the greatest stressors one can imagine. Not only does it raise the constant and extreme fear of a relentless deterioration and death, but it also creates a social isolation that pervades all aspects of people�s lives. Social isolation, alone, has been associated with a 100% to 200% increase in mortality in several studies. The amount of psychological stress in people diagnosed HIV positive is likely to be much greater than the stress in the people in these studies.�
�Studies�have shown that severe, chronic stress results in a syndrome remarkably similar to AIDS�characterized by a reduction of the number of T-lymphocytes, with special targeting of CD4, helper T cells. Severe stress has also been linked to�AIDS defining conditions, including pneumonia, tuberculosis, dementia, wasting, and death. Stress has been demonstrated�to cause brain damage and neuronal atrophy, resulting in a dementia that mirrors �HIV dementia���
�Recent studies revealed that 20% to 40% [of ELISA negative risk-free blood donors] might have an indeterminate Western Blot ... This means that any one of us, if given a Western Blot HIV antibody test, will have a 20% to 40% chance of having our serum react with proteins that are supposedly specific to HIV! Such a high rate of indeterminates on a test that supposedly determines life or death issues is outrageously high. The incredible reliance of patients, doctors, and scientists on tests with such obvious inconsistencies is a cause for alarm, and yet it appears that the only people sounding the alarm are not being listened to.�
�Finding viral loads and false positive PCR�s in HIV-negative people should be a major wake-up call to people diagnosed �HIV-positive,� their doctors, scientists working in the field, and the public at large, because these tests are repeatedly used to make clinical decisions about treatment.�
�What makes results like these even more surprising is that they were never reported in the media, nor were they discussed in the research community, nor were they presented to physicians at AIDS conferences, and finally, they were definitely never told to people diagnosed �HIV-positive.��
�People with the exact same illnesses and symptoms are given different diagnoses based solely on the result of an HIV antibody test, which creates a completely artificial correlation between HIV and AIDS. Tuberculosis with a positive HIV antibody test is AIDS, but tuberculosis with a negative test is just tuberculosis, even if it is occurring in an IV drug user with multiple opportunistic infections.�
�Of even greater concern than the existence of these problems [with HIV science] is the fact that no one in the conventional medical and scientific establishment seems to be asking questions about them.�
�A compelling argument can be made that much of what we call AIDS is a self-fulfilling prophecy which might happen as follows:
�a) The severe, acute psychological stress of being diagnosed �HIV Positive� is quickly transformed into a severe, chronic psychological stress of living with a prediction of a horrifying decline that could start at any time. This causes a suppression of the immune system, with selective depletion of CD4 T-cells�
�b) After testing positive, people are often put on�the most potent broad-spectrum antibiotics, as well as �antiretroviral� agents like AZT, ddI, ddC, and protease inhibitors. Although the toxicities of the �antiretrovirals� have been outlined elsewere, antibiotics also often have debilitating side effects which are easily blamed on HIV, including immune suppression�they lead to a complete disruption of the normal microbial flora present in the gastrointestinal system�[which is] one of the most important protectors against infection�These antibiotics also often lead to the development of multidrug-resistant strains of bacteria, fungi, and viruses, which can later ravage a person�s system...
�c) Once the immune system starts to crack under the strain of the emotional stress, previous health problems (if there were any), and disrupted natural defenses, the diagnosis of AIDS is made. If not already on �antiretrovirals,� then the person will now definitely be started on them, with all of the toxic effects.
�d) The new �cocktails� are to be given until the patient dies, with no exceptions, if possible�This is because of the theory that mutant, drug resistant, HIV will flourish if they go off of their treatment�It is heavily stressed that the patient must not miss a single dose...When the patient�s health begins to fail, the failure is blamed on the effects of this �mutated HIV,� possibly due to the patient�s poor compliance. Rarely are the drug toxicities and complications caused by the treatment held responsible.� Problems with HIV Science, �AIDS and the Voodoo Hex� � Dr. Matthew Irwin, MD, Washington, DC
�I hold the idea that the AIDS is not a viral disease, but is a metabolic disorder precipitated by an exaggerated way of life. It can equally be caused by severe malnutrition in poorer and famine stricken societies. I know this view is completely against the current beliefs forced by media presentation of a social problem, but it is the responsibility of dedicated scientists to take into consideration and explore all aspects to this problem. We are only now beginning to understand what AIDS may be. We know one thing it is not, a virus produced disease!�
�...We should not close our eyes to new information just because we are sold the idea that this condition is caused by a class of viruses conveniently called HIV.�
�For some time now it has been scientifically shown and recognized that those suffering from AIDS demonstrate a marked variation in the amino acid pool of their body. They are consistently and drastically short of methionine, cystine and cysteine--very important amino acids. They also have a manyfold rise in the levels of arginine and glutamate...
�...In a series of other experiments, when IL-6 and another similar substance (TNF -tumor necrosis factor) are added to a cell culture medium that contains cells with the ability to produce the virus, particles labeled HIV are extruded... Thus, there is a direct correlation between HIV production in AIDS and amino acid content of the virus growing cell. It seems on the face of it that AIDS patients are a victim of an imbalance in their bodies� amino acid composition...�
�It is unfortunate that we are looking at the virus and not seeing the physiological imbalance in AIDS patients. It is also unfortunate that we do not understand the subordinate metabolic roles of IL-6 to cortisone-releasing mechanism and IL-1 production...
It is most unfortunate that virologists are presenting the �site clearance action� of [IL-6 and TNF] in the body as steps in the production of HIV in cell culture media. On this fragment of unconnected information is placed the whole argument that AIDS is a virus-caused disease. Why? Because a test has been designed that marks and shows the particular fragments produced by IL-6 or TNF. It seems that some of these DNA or RNA particles are labeled as HIV -- and that is why there are several types.
�Unfortunate to the extreme is the �commercialization of the idea� that everyone that shows positive HIV test will soon die from AIDS, whereas the anxiety of having an incurable disease could become a killer by itself.�
�...With repeated secretion of semen into a male or a female rectum, immune system suppression is unavoidable--not because of a �virus,� but because of the chemical properties of the semen itself. Women, who participate in anal sex to avoid becoming pregnant, should be aware of this immune suppressive property of semen.�
�If the cells that are sufficiently abnormal to produce HIV are given cysteine, their abnormality is corrected and they do not produce the HIV. All we needed to know now is how did these AIDS patients become cysteine-deficient? We should commence the research of this phenomenon and not sidetrack AIDS research into a dead end by making a jump of faith and assuming it to be virus produced.�
�In my opinion, it seems the �HIV test� highlights the presence of a fragment of DNA or RNA of a damaged cell--it indicates a process of cell nucleus breakdown. It could be produced by many other factors, one of them cysteine and zinc deficiency, particularly in underdeveloped and poorer countries. It is also possible that it is caused as a result of persistent and increasingly severe local damage in the rectum, producing a long-term run on the body's protein reserves. This test by itself is not an accurate indicator of the presence of an agent that causes the disease. The HIV itself produced by a more severe imbalance in the make up of the amino acid pool of the body. It is this devastating amino acid pool imbalance that kills the patients, and not the HIV particle.�
�...When morphine or heroin is used, the sensations of hunger and thirst are also suppressed and the body begins to feed off itself. In countries where people used to smoke opium, a great number of these people eventually died of lung infections--exactly what is now blamed on the virus and contaminated needles.�
�It is also important to know that there is a time gap of many years between the recognition of HIV in the body and the production of clinical symptoms of immune suppression. I can assure you, the amino acid imbalance during this time gap becomes a far more potent killer than the �virus of AIDS.�...�
�The children in Romania that were the subject of many television programs most probably did not get AIDS from blood contamination, they more than likely developed AIDS as a result of malnutrition.�
�Another point that needs to be discussed is the value of the AIDS test as an indicator of a disease in the process of development. This is what everyone is led to believe. This in my opinion is an erroneous representation of a different truth. All this test shows is that the body has come across this antigenic particle and has registered its structure. It also means that the body has kept the existence of this particle/virus in its memory-bank to manufacture a defense mechanism against the �foreign particle,� not necessarily a particle from outside, but a particle that the body itself should not make--a form of quality control at the �DNA assembly line.� This test is ultimately an indicator of a body�s amino acid metabolism disturbance, and not an indicator of a loose killer virus in the body.�
�Let us remember, if the camel had a back breaking-point to the weight of the last straw, surely the human body must also have a breaking-point to being life-stylishly overloaded. The question is, do we continue to measure the straw or the inherent structural and physiological limitations? Do we pay attention to the limitations of the body, or do we in carefree abandon blame an ineffective slow virus for the ills that befall some members of our society?� Your Body�s Many Cries for Water � Fereydoon Batmanghelidj, MD, St. Mary�s Hospital Medical School of London University. Author, Your Body�s Many Cries for Water, ABC of Asthma, Allergies and Lupus, Water Cures: Drugs Kill and other books
�Let�s say you are a medical scientist who has wondered, from time to time, whether HIV is really the cause of AIDS or whether AIDS is as simple as one virus. It�s a reasonable question, given that we�re 20 years into the epidemic without much in the way of enduring therapy. But do you really want to express this opinion? Or merely raise the question? If you do, then the new Gestapo will likely pay you a visit. Forget about that government grant. Forget about the raise. You will find yourself marginalized, your reputation smeared and you�ll probably be out on the street.�
�I have worked as a medical science reporter for 30 years. I�ve interviewed thousands of scientists for newspaper and magazine stories, radio and television productions, and books. I�ve met scientists who at least try to keep an open and fair mind on scientific issues. I have also met many propagandists who think they�re scientists. In all the time I�ve worked as a journalist, I�ve never come across a nastier group of people to interview than those propagandists who work in HIV research.� Second Opinion, ABCNews.com 1999
�From very early on with AIDS, I began to see that the science was not being followed very carefully. There was a rush to judgment on many fronts, a lot of speculation...I smelled a rat from the very beginning, and kept up with it ever since.� New York Press, March 10, 2000 � Nicholas Regush, Medical Science Reporter, Former Science Producer, ABC News with Peter Jennings, Editor, Red Flags Daily
�This is most outrageous. HIV being the cause of AIDS is a hypothesis. A hypothesis is an assumption made by scientists for discussion about their scientific problems. The public in some peculiar way have accepted the hypothesis as a proven theory.�
�The war on AIDS is being fought like �Vietnam� with the media as cheerleaders. Many people are making a good living out of it, writing positive reports, no matter how negative the results are. Heads of activists groups are drawing good salaries, up to $200,000 per annum. Like �Vietnam,� when casualties, side effects in this case, are mounting and the media stop cheering, the mood will change.�
�The high death rates due to AIDS in the early 1990s were due to aggressive treatments with AZT which may have activated AIDS, but the HIV industry claims the relatively lower death rates in the late 1990s were due to the efficacy of the cocktails (mainly consisting of protease inhibitors) on HIV. This is false. The relatively low death rates would not have appeared if the high death rates due to aggressive treatments with AZT had not occurred in the early 1990s. Many HIV-positive people, not treated with the cocktails, have remained healthy for more than fifteen years.�
�Of course, iatrogenic [caused by medicine] effects will be more obvious when healthy HIV-positive people are treated and become sick�The benefits may only exist in the imagination of doctors. They would feel better when they think something can be done. It is more likely that the harm is real and the benefit is zero, because HIV does not cause AIDS.�
�The HIV industry is going to recover its investment by marketing those drugs to the third world. South Africa refused to pay for those drugs with borrowed money. The HIV industry has turned its attention to China�s bulging foreign currency reserve. There are very few AIDS dissidents in China. Rumour-mongering is China�s national pastime. This makes China an easy target.�
�When they finally admit HIV does not cause AIDS, there will be violent reaction from the market, because the HIV industry has spent billions of dollars in HIV research and most of the money may not be recoverable.� An Alternative Approach to AIDS and Related Problems: Book 2 � Dr. Ching-Chee Chan, PhD in physical chemistry, University of Manchester, UK, 1967; AIDS researcher and writer, Canada
�These are truly dark times for science. The take home message from the recent Barcelona AIDS conference is that incompetent AIDS scientists and even more incompetent medical reporters are wasting lives and money while creating sanctions against medical breakthroughs by refusing to listen to anyone who questions their conclusion that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS.�
�[Anthony] Fauci is one of the US Government�s major architects of the myth that HIV has been proven to be the cause of AIDS and that stopping HIV will save lives�a myth that has become so entrenched in medicine�s conventional wisdom that to question it is tantamount [to] treason.�
�There are not sufficient enough data to understand the properties of HIV because the scientific literature is nothing more than opinions, poorly conducted studies and reviews of poorly conducted studies.�
�In a letter to the [U.S.] Department of Health and Human Services last year, I suggested that their position that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS is substantially based on scientists studying complex mixtures of biological fluids with unknown numbers of regulatory genes and concluding that one big structural gene, HIV, is causing the syndrome. This is medical incompetence at its worst.� Red Flags Weekly debate, July 22, 2002
�U.S. government funded AIDS research has become a jobs program for scientists who lack the courage and resources to challenge conventional scientific wisdom.�
�For a Federal employee to sign such a document [The Durban Declaration]�is an abuse of power. It is using your government position � in Fauci�s case, a high government position � to, in effect, bully anyone who disagrees with you. I consider this to be a violation of scientific ethics. The scientific method is based, at least partially, on debate. To call for the end to a debate is unscientific; to do so with the power of the US government behind you is unethical.�
�By throwing the weight of the US government behind the Durban Declaration, those who signed have established an international policy that salaries, funding, prestige, scholarly communication, promotion, awards and prizes will not be granted to individuals who challenge the official position that HIV alone causes AIDS. This creates government sanctions against anyone who wants to freely investigate the actual relationship (if any) between HIV and AIDS. This is unethical.�
�I seriously doubt that Fauci or any Health and Human Services employee or government grant recipient would like to debate me on HIV/AIDS online, but I would welcome such a debate.� Red Flags Weekly debate, April 1, 2002 � Dr. Howard Urnovitz, PhD, Microbiologist and Immunologist, Science Director, Chronic Illness Research Foundation, co-founder and CEO, Chronix Biomedical. Dr. Urnovitz�s team developed the only FDA-licensed urine-based diagnostic test for antibodies to HIV.
�When, some seven years ago, I first heard of Peter Duesberg�s claims, I found them indulgent and dangerous. Here was a Berkeley professor playing with people�s lives�and their heads�in the middle of an epidemic in which their practices made a vital difference. Eventually, as Duesberg�s voice remained alive and as the epidemic continued, I decided to go talk to him.
�Duesberg outlined a controlled experiment on hemophiliacs and stated that he would formally print a retraction of his views if someone could assemble the facts to prove him wrong. As detailed in his new book, Duesberg�s main claim was that it was the foreign proteins in the blood-clotting factor, factor VIII, that were causing immunosuppression, not HIV. Patients taking purified, recombinant factor VIII would have a stronger immune system and would consequently be healthier.
�I contacted an acquaintance, a professor of biostatistics at Berkeley, and we went looking for the data. We were neutral, simply eager to contribute to settling this unsettling affair. We are still waiting. More accurately, we have given up. We never were allowed access to taxpayer-funded data. We waited in lunchrooms of prestigious hospitals before realizing that our host was not going to appear with the data and was too embarrassed to join us for lunch. Our phone calls were never answered.
�After the passage of more than 15 years and the expenditure of more than $30 billion, surely we must establish whether the HIV hypothesis is true or false. Duesberg has �put up.� It�s time for others to either make him �shut up,� through scientific evidence, or for them to engage in the highest of scientific virtues: rethinking their positions in the face of new evidence.� California Monthly June 1996 � Dr. Paul Rabinow, PhD, Professor of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, author most recently of Making PCR: A Story of Biotechnology
�The central figure of Bialy�s book is Peter Duesberg, a classical, no-nonsense University of California, Berkeley, professor who has for more than 20 years presented data and interpretations to cancer and AIDS scientists that call into question�that specific genes when mutated cause cancer, and [that] HIV causes AIDS. The sadly predictable result of questioning these two sacred cows of modern biomedicine was the almost complete destruction of a once lofty professional standing.�
��To this reader, Duesberg�s situation suggests parallels with�the Nobel Prize winner Barbara McClintock. For decades her work was ignored�yet how right she turned out to be. The inescapable conclusion: clean data and perceptive, unbiased analyses win every time.�
�As far as this reviewer is concerned, Duesberg gets the Big Picture correct on both cancer and AIDS because he demands the highest standards of data interpretation, something that is a common casualty in the cancer and AIDS fields where fame, stock options, potential blockbuster drugs, appearances on Larry King Live and the front cover of Time or Newsweek, often appear to take precedence�Duesberg represents a golden era of molecular biology when there was no room for the shoddy overinterpretations and unimpressive correlations that pass for some of today�s cancer and AIDS �breakthroughs�.�
�How can you perform academic or commercially relevant biology if you don�t think deeply? If you don�t have a coherent theory and if you are dependent upon sophisticated technologies and bioinformatic protocols� then your data interpretations are in the realm of voodoo science. It is painfully obvious by now that this is where many cancer and AIDS researchers have located themselves�a conclusion attested to by the�mountain of contradictions in the scientific literature concerning presumed HIV pathogenesis, AIDS morbidity, mortality, epidemiology and demography. Having got it so wrong, they can�t buy their way out of their self generated cul-de-sacs.� Review of �Oncogenes, Aneuploidy and AIDS: A Scientific Life & Times of Peter H. Duesberg� by Harvey Bialy, July 7, 2004, Nature Biotechnology
�Bottom line; Duesberg is correct on both counts...on the basis of DATA...not hysteria. Your readers can be as angry as they like, but they should save their anger until after they have evaluated clinical DATA...and then they should direct their anger at their own medical profession.�
�The scientific data do not support the hypothesis that the HIV virus causes AIDS. If you have Kaposi sarcoma and you have antibodies to the HIV virus, the CDC says you have AIDS...by definition! If you are diagnosed with Kaposi sarcoma and you don�t have antibodies to HIV, then you don�t have AIDS...you have Kaposi sarcoma!...go figure!�
�I have the luxuries of both being retired, and not being �in the system�...I don�t depend on government grants and hence can evaluate data without fear or favor... The entire AIDS and cancer areas are a mess. All current hypotheses are plainly incorrect, inadequate or in many cases absolutely falsifiable on the basis of existing data...this is all that Duesberg is pointing out.� Dean�s World web blog, December 30, 2004
�...The CDC classifies individuals with any of these diseases as Aids if antibody to Hiv is present. However, there is no detectable infectious Hiv in most patients, only antibodies. Thus, the 100% correlation between Hiv and Aids is not one of natural coincidence but of semantic contrivance. Furthermore, the mortality of Hiv antibody-positive individuals treated with anti-Hiv drugs is greater than that of mostly untreated Hiv-antibody positive individuals, a disturbing finding in regard to current therapies.�
�Therapeutic progress in human disease requires solid clinical data, not scare mongering.� Nature Biotechnology, September, 2004 � Dr. George L. Gabor Miklos, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer, Human Genetic Signatures, Sydney, Australia; Director, Secure Genetics, Sydney; Consultant in Functional Genomics to Novartis Pharmaceuticals and to the CELERA Human, Mouse and Drosophila Genome Projects. Formerly with University of California, University of Washington, University of Edinburgh, the Neurosciences Institute, The SCRIPPS Research Institute and the Australian National University.
�If not Hiv, what can cause Aids? � The following factors are widely recognized causes of immune suppression, compromised health, and opportunistic infections, as documented in the medical literature for more than 70 years� malnutrition and chronic lack of sleep�Poverty, crowded living conditions and unclean water� Immune-compromising chemicals include drugs such as AZT and other cancer chemotherapy compounds, protease inhibitors, antibiotics and steroids, and recreational drugs such as cocaine, crack, heroin, nitrites (poppers), and methamphetamines (crystal, speed)��
�Chemotherapy targets and destroys the bone marrow cells from which all immune cells derive. They also kill fully formed immune cells�B cells and red blood cells. Chemotherapy destroys the digestive system by killing the cells that compose the inner lining of the digestive tract which interferes with the body�s ability to�digest nutrients, causing malnutrition� chemotherapy suppresses normal immune function, increases susceptibility to�infections, and can cause life-threatening anemia and diarrhea. AZT, ddI, ddC, D4T and 3TC are all chemotherapy compounds used as antiviral AIDS treatments.�
�Protease inhibitors cause impaired liver function and liver failure�kidney failure, dangerously high cholesterol levels, diarrhea�Steroids are a known cause of immune deficiency often prescribed to AIDS patients to counteract the muscle wasting caused by AZT. Antibiotics, especially when used habitually, can cause yeast infection and diarrhea�Septra and Bactrim are sulfonamide antibiotics commonly prescribed for�HIV positives. These drugs are�notorious for their side effects�nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, anorexia, bone marrow destruction, rashes, fever, hepatitis, and anemia...�
�The immunosuppressive effects of recreational drug abuse �include pneumonias, mouth sores, fevers, endocarditis, bacterial infections and night sweats�all conditions now associated with AIDS. Amphetamine[s] suppress the appetite, causing chronic users to suffer from malnutrition� insecticides and herbicides can also impair immune function.�
�Factor VIII (the blood clotting agent used by hemophiliacs) and blood transfusions are immune suppressive and leave patients vulnerable to infection� half of all HIV negative transfusion recipients die within a year of receiving a transfusion.�
��Chronic anxiety, panic, stress and depression [such as is caused by a positive HIV test] have been shown to�damage immune function, and result in symptoms identical to AIDS. Mental stress provokes production of the hormone cortisol; excessive cortisol causes rapid and dramatic reductions in T cells, a condition known as lymphocytopenia.�
�Beliefs and expectations are well-known to manifest in the physical body. [This] was detailed dramatically in 1942 by Dr. Walter B. Cannon in his accounts of��voodoo death,� a form of capital punishment practiced among certain Aboriginal tribes. Cannon reported that shamans, tribal medical authorities thought to possess special powers, were able to kill errant tribe members by simply pointing at them with a bone. Convinced of the shaman�s ability to invoke a lethal curse, the people pointed at died within a matter of hours or days.�
�The high correlation that appears to exist between HIV and AIDS is not proof of causation, but rather an artifact of the AIDS definition: AIDS is defined as any one of 30 old diseases (such as pneumonia, yeast infection, TB, cancer, diarrhea, salmonella, etc.) that occurs in people who have also registered positive on an HIV antibody test. AIDS can only occur, by definition, in people who test HIV antibody positive.
Pneumonia + HIV Antibodies = AIDS
Pneumonia - HIV Antibodies = Pneumonia
Diarrhea + HIV Antibodies = AIDS
Diarrhea - HIV Antibodies = Diarrhea�
�Antibodies produced in response to simple infections like a cold or the flu can cause a [false] positive reaction on an HIV antibody test. A flu shot and other immunizations� having or having had herpes or hepatitis�vaccination for hepatitis B�microbes such as those that cause tuberculosis and malaria�tapeworms and other parasites�alcoholism or liver disease and blood that is altered through [recreational] drug use�pregnancy and prior pregnancy� antibodies [to] mycobacterium and yeast, infections which are found in 90% of AIDS patients�[all can] cause false positive HIV test results.�
�In one study [Rodriguez, et al, 1985] 13% of Amazonian Indians who do not have AIDS and who have no contact with people outside their own tribe tested HIV positive. In another report, 50% of blood samples from healthy dogs reacted positively on HIV antibody tests.� [Strandstrom, et al, 1990] What if Everything You Thought You Knew About Aids Was Wrong? � Christine Maggiore, Former Director, Alive and Well (aliveandwell.org), author, What if Everything You Thought You Knew About Aids Was Wrong?
�This book [What if Everything You Thought You Knew About Aids Was Wrong?] exposes the many incongruencies in conventional wisdom and establishes why we must question how AIDS research and treatment are currently conducted. The paradox of the search for an AIDS cure is that the thing most needed�open debate and scientific exchange�is the thing most feared by the AIDS establishment.� Amazon.com � Bob Guccione Jr., Editor and publisher, Gear Magazine
�As a prison medical officer in South Africa, I partly agree with President Mbeki�s sceptical view of current statistical research into HIV infection and AIDS. The research data tend to be formulated from actuarial models and short trials in pregnant women attending antenatal clinics. Pregnancy is known to cause a raised rate of false positive results on testing for HIV infection with ELISA. The results of such research lead to frightening statistics, giving the impression that the whole of southern Africa will be depopulated within the next 24 months.�
�In South Africa�s prisons there is a vast overcrowded (often 30 people per cell) population in which homosexuality is widespread and condom use practically non-existent. This is the perfect breeding ground for the rapid spread of HIV. This prison, which holds 550 inmates and is always full or overfull, has an HIV infection rate of 2 to 4% and has had only two deaths from AIDS in the seven years I have been working there.
�The HIV infection rate for all South Africa�s prisons is currently 2.3%. The rate in the prison population should be higher than that in the general population, or at least the same. But the figures for prisons in South Africa are way below those generated by actuarial models and antenatal data, which purportedly reflect the incidence of infection in the general population.� [WHO estimates that 20% of adult South Africans have HIV]
�A widespread mystical attitude towards HIV/AIDS gives this disease recognition out of all proportion to its incidence.� British Medical Journal, 26 Jan 2002 � Dr. Stuart W. Dwyer, MD, part time district surgeon (forensic medical officer), Grahamstown, South Africa
Glad to see this. My first exposure to Aids contrarianism was a book by Jon Rappaport called Aids Inc. about 20 yr. ago. But the greatest work of art is a book by Bryan Ellison entitled Why We Will Never Win the War on AIDS. Apparently the book is hard to come by. It is worth its weight in gold.
"AIDS" is the scam of all time. Here is the base of the HIV-causes-AIDS fairy tale: that for no reason whatsoever, Mother Nature decides to destroy your immune system. And she does it by exposing poor little you to a virus called HIV. Stay away from the virus and you will never "get" AIDS. End of story.
My first exposure to Aids contrarianism was a book by Jon Rappaport called Aids Inc. about 20 yr. ago. But the greatest work of art is a book by Bryan Ellison entitled Why We Will Never Win the War on AIDS. Apparently the book is hard to come by. It is worth its weight in gold.
Went to Amazon.com & noticed it was published in '94. I have an online friend who did alot of research on Aids years ago.. wonder if he has read Bryan Ellison's thoughts.
Very good, thank you for suggesting this book!!
My father thought it was a hoax, and there are doctors not on that list that think it's a hoax too.
If breast cancer was cured, Ms Komen would have to find another gig that paid a half-million a year.
My experience with HIV and drug abuse is small, but I do know this. A former associate had gone to the hospital VERY ill. His immune system was GONE! When he stopped freebasing cocaine, his immune system returned.
Overheard a gentleman being treated for AIDS talking to a musician. Mr Aids patient hadn't stopped doing coke, speed, MDMA, or any of the other hard drugs I would suspect would suppress his immune system. Oh well, the cocktail of AZT and others would surely kill him regardless. Might as well die high.
__________________ I'd rather meander for the prevention than race for the cure.
The research that says HIV is the cause of AIDS? There are 10,000 people in the world now who specialize in HIV. None has any interest in the possibility HIV doesn�t cause AIDS because if it doesn�t, their expertise is useless.�
People keep asking me, �You mean you don�t believe that HIV causes AIDS?� And I say, �Whether I believe it or not is irrelevant! I have no scientific evidence for it.� I might believe in God, and He could have told me in a dream that HIV causes AIDS. But I wouldn�t stand up in front of scientists and say, �I believe HIV causes AIDS because God told me.� I�d say, �I have papers here in hand and experiments that have been done that can be demonstrated to others.� It�s not what somebody believes, it�s experimental proof that counts. And those guys don�t have that.
Does HIV Really Cause AIDS?
Hybrid Mode
