A I D SÝÝ &ÝÝ H I V
CURRENTLY
UNRECOGNIZED ASPECTS ON CAUSATION WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR TREATMENT AND PROGNOSISFel! Bokm”rket ”r inte
definierat.
by
PROFESSOR JENS JERNDAL, MD(MA), MSc, DSc hc,
BA, FWAIM, KROD, KCJSJ
e-mail: Dr.J@life-expansion.com
- website: www.life-expansion.com
In this article I will share
some very important independently
researched and so far mostly unrecognized aspects of AIDS, that have the
potential of radically changing both its treatment and its prognosis.
To get a proper perspective,
let¥s first take a quick tour of how it all started and evolved till now:
THE TRUE HISTORY OF A I D SÝ IN A NUTSHELL:
In June 1981 a researcher in Los
Angeles, Dr. Michael Gottlieb, published a report on the first five documented
AIDS cases (though not yet called by this name). The US health authorities in
the guise of the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) took immediate notice and
launched a theory, which has since been relentlessly reinforced by all means
and has led to the present official dogma about AIDS and the HIV.
Our officially sanctioned
medical science, being what it is, i.e. mechanistic, reductionist and narrowly
specialized, immediately argued in terms of a single cause, preferably an
invader such as a bacterium or a virus. The Communicable Disease Center (CDC),
being what it is, namely specialized in infectious disease, immediately saw an
epidemic ñ from five cases! They must have been desperate to find something to
dig their teeth into! At that time official medicine still knew very little
about the human immune system and how it functions, and to blame drugs or
chemicals was the last thing it was interested in.
Once media with the
encouragement of the CDC blew up this "gay disease" as a potential
threat to the population at large, there was naturally great pressure to find
the cause and a remedy.
In 1982 the French scientist Luc
Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute thought he had discovered a new retrovirus
and sent a lab sample to the prominent career virologist Robert Gallo in the
USA for an opinion. Gallo took advantage of Montagnier's trust, and ventured to
claim the discovery as his own. For this he was later found guilty of
ìscientific misconductî.
By 1983 media had whipped up a
public awareness that soon began to show signs of a budding panic. A solution
was becoming pressing.
Then in April 1984, with the
official backing of the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret
Heckler (a lawyer, not a doctor), Gallo held a press conference, declaring that
the new retrovirus, which he claimed to have discovered in a small number of
AIDS patients, was the ìprobableî cause of AIDS. The new retrovirus was
peremptorily named "the Human Immunodeficiency Virus" (HIV). The word
ìprobableî was immediately dropped, never to be admitted again. Margaret
Heckler proclaimed, ìToday we add another miracle to the long honor roll of
American medicine and scienceî.
The cause of AIDS had been
established by government decree and a media coup. Would it be pure coincidence
that 1984 was election year, and that Ronald Reagan wanted to be re-elected?
Directly after the press
conference, Gallo patented his test for HIV antibodies, which has since made
him a millionaire. As will be explained in the following, this test is not only
inadequate and essentially meaningless, but it turns into an insidious death
trap for those who test positive.
Now that a cause had been
assigned, a remedy had to be found. And one appeared on the scene with
lightning speed under the names of Ziduvine and Retrovir, but better known as
AZT. What few people know is that AZT was originally developed in the US in the
early l960ies as chemotherapy treatment for cancer. It was, however, at that
time found completely unsuited for human consumption, due to its extreme
toxicity, and was therefore not even patented but shelved and forgotten. A few
years later it was patented by the US National Institute of Health (NIH), but
still not authorized for use.
AZT was now quickly sold to the
pharmaceutical giant Burroughs-Wellcome by the US medical authorities who owned
the patent, and rushed through the US drug testing protocols at record speed,
dispensing with normally required safety procedures, to emerge as the only
authorized treatment for AIDS. The one and only drug trial on which this
authorization was based, was later shown to have been manipulated and
fraudulent in order to produce a positive result.
AZT is not Ýan ìanti-viral medicineî, as is deceitfully
claimed, but a DNA chain terminator or cell poison. In other words, it is an
extremely toxic form of chemotherapy which, if taken in large enough doses, and
long enough, will inevitably cause death by itself. The long list of its very
serious side effects, many of them life-threatening, reads just like the list
of symptoms ascribed to full-blown AIDS. Anyone can check this out by reading
the information that the law requires the manufacturer to provide.
It is thought-provoking to
observe that this old cancer drug, that for 20 years was banned with the motivation
that its extreme toxicity made it unsuited for human consumption, was now
promptly released as the only authorized remedy for AIDS patients belonging to
the socially undesirable ìrisk groupsî male homosexuals, intravenous drug
addicts, Haitian immigrants, prostitutes and hemophiliacs.
It is also a chilling thought
that the latest and by far the largest ìrisk groupî targeted for marketing AZT
and its more recent companion drugs, is the population of black Africa, and
especially its pregnant mothers and newborn children. No wonder South Africa¥s
President is reacting; the first political leader with enough vision, common
sense and courage to do so.
AZT has carried one of the
highest pricetags of any drug on the market, while at the same time it must have
been one of the cheapest to put into circulation, thanks to its long and
unglamorous history. Talk about profiteering. Every AIDS patient who has taken
AZT as prescribed, has died after a long time of agony and suffering. AZT has
been one of Wellcome's greatest profit makers, selling for billions of dollars,
and making their shares soar on the Stock Exchange.
By 1986, two years after Gallo¥s
press conference, alternative views on AIDS had begun to appear in print,
exposing a constructive holistic approach, but these were effectively
suppressed, and never even mentioned in conventional medical publications, nor
in mainstream media.
In 1987 Dr. Peter Duesberg, who
was Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California at
Berkeley, a distinguished member of the American Academy of Science and
probably the world's foremost expert on retro-viruses, stepped forward and
became the most authoritative advocate in the USA for an alternative view. He,
and eventually hundreds of top scientists and experienced health practitioners
all over the world, among them several Nobel Laureates, began to question most
of the postulates of the officially proclaimed AIDS doctrine. But their
well-established views have consistently been denied publication in
professional journals and are hardly ever reported by mainstream media. More
importantly, they have been ignored or actively suppressed by practically all
publicly sponsored medical institutions which have close links with the
pharmaceutical industry.
Professor Duesberg claims that
HIV cannot possibly cause AIDS, that AIDS is not contagious at all, and that
drugs of all kinds are the main factor for the failure of the immune system,
which we now call AIDS. Even Montagnier, the original French discoverer of the
HIV, has declared that in his opinion the HIV cannot alone cause AIDS. Duesberg
further claims that by prescribing AZT to treat HIV, doctors in fact produce AIDS in
their patients. He provocatively calls this "administering AIDS by
prescription".
Professor Duesberg was promptly
given the full political treatment of heavy-handed suppression of his views.
Scientific journals that had published all he had submitted previously now
refused to publish his papers. He was banned from speaking at conferences and
from participating in TV programs. He was submitted to strong pressure with
threats and bribes from US health authorities to return to the fold and
officially back the virus dogma. The final blow, when he resisted, was the
withdrawal of his research grants and the downgrading of his status at the
university.
Does this sound like the freedom
of expression inscribed in the US constitution? Does this sound like freedom of
science? ñ Doesn¥t it rather sound like censorship and dictatorial powers over
the minds of those who think differently, inluding some of the most eminent
scientists of the day? Wouldn¥t you call this a monopoly on opinion and
thought? A monopoly on ìtruthî established by political decree?Ý And what could it possibly have to do with
science?
In spite of fighting against
such very heavy odds, Duesberg has been given increasing support from hundreds
of prominent independent scientists and health professionals from all over the
world who are free from vested profit or career interests and brave enough to
challenge the establishment.
Please note that those who
question the official HIV-AIDS hypothesis have nothing to gain by doing so. On
the contrary, they are risking their careers and their livelihoods, and it is
costing them money. In stark contrast, to most of those who fanatically and
without sufficient proof try to impose the official AIDS dogma, it means big
money, political power and prestige.
Last year, when President Mbeki
of South Africa decided to invite some of the most prominent ìdissentingî
scientists to a discussion panel in order to hear different scientific opinions
on the causation and possible remedies for the syndrome, the AIDS industry felt
so threatened, that it published full page advertisements in the US newspapers to
counter ìa few colleagues who claim that the cause of AIDS is in doubtî. It
failed to mention that the mentioned ìfew colleaguesî are now numbered in the
thousands and include some of the most distinguished experts in the field,
among them several Nobel laureates and professors at prestigious universities.
If this can slip by as misrepresentation of facts, then the continued
statement, ìThere is no such scientific controversyî is nothing less than a
blatant lie. The advertisement is full of unsubstantiated and deceptive
assertions. Who paid for these advertisements? ñ The answer is ìamfARî, a
ìbeneficî AIDS organization generously funded by the manufacturer of AZT!
Incredible as it will sound to
most, it is a fact that there is still no proof whatsoever of HIV causing
AIDS, in spite of the ever-present dogmatic pounding for 17 years by the press
of the phrases ìHIV, the virus that causes AIDSî and ìAIDS, the disease caused
by the HIVî. And none of the expensive toxic drugs prescribed for AIDS has so
far cured a single patient.
Some may argue ñ
believing in the well-rehearsed chorus of the newspapers, for which they are
being handsomely paid in advertizing moneyÝ
ñ that the new drugs, HAART and others, have produced miracles,
prolonging life and improving life quality for the patients. Well, I beg to
differ: Anyone who has attentively and objectively followed the development of
AIDS and its treatment, knows that the îside effectsî of the drugs have been
devastating, that those who have chosen not to take the prescribed drugs have
survived much longer, and with very much better quality of life.
There are above all two
important facts that have made it possible to get away with this grave
deception:
One is that AZT was
prescribed in massive doses during the first years, and for this reason most
patients who took the drugs as prescribed died within 2 years. Then doses were
gradually and very substantially reduced, and this alone accounts for longer
survival. With no drugs at all, I have no doubt whatsoever that survival
figures would have been far better still.
The other fact is that
the basis for published statistics has changed over the years. The longer
survival shown in later years is in part only an illusion due to the inequality
of the data included. One explanation is that with the proliferation of Gallo¥s
profitable test, the number of healthy people diagnosed as HIV-positive has
grown, and the longer they live, the better the survival statistics. Survival
of people with full-blown AIDS being treated with cell-poison is another
matter, and if they now live longer it is because they are getting smaller
doses of the drugs than before, or less toxic drugs.
An additional factor
that may also positively influence survival time, is greater patient awareness
and independence, with increased use of alternative forms of treatment.
A I D SÝ ISÝ
DIFFERENT FROM ALL OTHER DISEASES
AIDS is different from all other
diseases, infectious or not, for the simple reason that it is not even a
disease at all. It is a condition of the human organism which allows disease to
take hold because the defence system is no longer active or efficient enough.
People do not die directly of AIDS. They die of one of a long list of illnesses
that all existed independently before AIDS, and that are usually easily
overcome by people with an efficient immune system. The general condition we
now call AIDS has also existed always, though it was rare. In a past era it
might have been called phthisis.
The official AIDS diagnosis
(distinct from just being HIV-positive) is a construct that has been changed
several times since the documentation of the first AIDS cases. It requires 1) a
positive HIV-test; 2) the presence of one of the growing list of different
illnesses that have been listed as companions to, or a result of, AIDS; 3) a
low T-cell count.
This
is a circular definition, which admits only AIDS-cases where certain
anti-bodies can be detected. All other AIDS-cases, with the same symptoms and
prognosis, are not called AIDS. Through this cunning but unscientific dodge, it
is claimed that in all AIDS-cases HIV is present. Then this artificially
conceived 100 percent correlation is adduced as ìproofî that HIV causes AIDS,
and that AIDS is caused by HIV.
But
even if there had been a true 100% coincidence or association between AIDS and
HIV antibodies, this could never be accepted as scientific proof of causation.
If that were proof of causation, then there is equally valid proof that it is
the cock that causes the Sun to rise! Every morning the Sun rises after the
cock has crowed. 100 percent correlation and always the same time sequence.
Consequently full scientific proof that it is the cock that brings the sun over
the horizon every morning!
The
claim that HIV causes AIDS is actually less convincing than would be the
claim that the cock causes the Sun to rise, because the sunrise is at least not
subject to a selective definition, which considers it to have risen only if the
cock has actually crowed, which is the construction made with regards to AIDS.
Even so, the correlation is
only one-sided, since a large number of people who have been diagnosed as
HIV-positive never develop AIDS. If we think this sounds like a major
inconvenience for the promoters of the HIV-causes-AIDS hypothesis, we underestimate
their resourcefulness.
There are two complementary
strategies to dodge that little problem. The first one is to indoctrinate
people into believing that anyone who is ìHIV+î must necessarily develop
ìfullblown AIDSî sooner or later, and that taking the expensive so called
anti-viral (read cell-poison) drugs early will ìdelay the onset of AIDSî, thus
buying a few extra years, although unfortunately there is no actual cure for
AIDS to date, so eventual death is inevitable. The drugs are also claimed to
ìimprove quality of lifeî during the illness.
Once patients have been
scared and bullied or seduced into accepting this drug regime, they are doomed.
They will promptly begin to develop ìAIDS symptomsî from the drugs, and within
a few years (how many depends on the dosis administered, the general state of
their immune system, and if they receive complementary supportive therapies)
the drugs will kill them, and they will become tragic victims of the terrible
AIDS ìepidemicî, recently promoted to ìpandemicî. See there the proof that HIV
causes AIDS, and that AIDS is incurable, in spite of the doctors¥ and the
pharmaceuticals¥ heroic scientific fight against it.
The second strategy is useful when an HIV-positive person refuses to take the drugs. It is then declared - without proof of any kind - that the virus has an indeterminate period of incubation or latency, but that sooner or later AIDS will manifest. The assumed incubation time has been conveniently stretched from 3 years when the hypothesis was new, to now 20 years (or indefinitely) as the years have gone by with drug-free HIV-positive people remaining healthy.
The
fact is that no proof whatsoever exists, for either the assertion that testing
positive to HIV must lead to AIDS or the assertion that AZT ñ or any other drug
- will delay the onset of AIDS. In fact, the very opposite is true, since AZT
inevitably produces AIDS in those who take it long enough, and so the 100%
correlation - and thus the ìproofî that HIV causes AIDS - is vindicated, if
the HIV-positive person takes AZT or a similarly toxic drug. Just think of the
juicy profits from this strategem to the inventor of the patented test method,
and the manufacturer of the drug! And the correspondingly fat ìkick-backsî to
those in medical authority who have imposed this tale of horror on a trusting
public and awarded a treatment monopoly to handpicked drug manufacturers,
outlawing all other forms of treatments.
Incidentally, to add insult to
injury, the test methods used to check for antibodies against the illusive HIV
are unspecific and most unreliable. More than 60 common medical conditions
unrelated to AIDS and HIV have been identified that can produce a false
positive test result, among them pregnancy. Should this not be more than enough
to shake the very foundations of the reigning AIDS dogma?
It is important to recognize
that there are a large number of AIDS cases (i.e. patients with a fatally
inactive or malfunctioning immune system) where no ìHIV antibodiesî are, or
ever were, present. On the other hand, there are a vast number of people who
have been diagnosed as "HIV-positive" who have a sufficiently
effective immune system to be in normal health, many of them ever since the
HIV-test was invented in 1984, provided - and this is crucial - that they are
not taking AZT or any similar drugs, nor are exposed to toxic chemicals, and
are sufficiently well nourished, generally look after themselves and
psychologically refuse to accept their death sentences.
Interestingly, antibodies to a
virus has up till now always signified immunity to that particular virus, and
consequently that one has nothing to worry about. To produce antibodies for
protection against infection is the purpose of all vaccinations. A vaccine
against HIV would thus produce the dreaded antibodies in those vaccinated and
make them test "HIV+". So what is the difference between
vaccine-induced antibodies and naturally acquired antibodies? Incidentally,
vaccination is one of the more than 60 conditions that can cause a false positive
test. Does this make sense, and where does it lead?
It should be noted, that one of
the many unverified claims made by the AIDS industry is that the HIV has been
isolated. So far, nobody has been able to isolate a single whole HIV in vivo
from an AIDS patient. Not what we thought they told us, is it?
Furthermore, the frequent
reference to ìviral loadî is another smoke screen of no value, that proves
nothing about the actual existence in the body of a particular virus misnamed
HIV, nor does it give any valid indication of clincial outcome. The whole
set-up is based on a few indirect and unspecific indices propped up by
fantastic speculation and imaginative conjecture, much of which goes against
the very grain of solidly established medical science.
THE
HIDDEN BENZENE CONNECTION
At the beginning of the
AIDS ìepidemicî, one of the high risk groups identified, was Haitian
immigrants. What these could have in common with the prime high risk group,
identified as young homosexual men in California and New York, was always a
mystery.Ý
Several years of research
by C.S. Byrnes and Jeremy F. Selvey of the People's International Health
Project (PIHP) and Project AIDSÝ
International in Los Angeles, California, into what they call "the
benzene link", has finally shed light on the Haitian mystery. This
research has also gone a long way towards establishing a link to several other
mysterious illnesses affecting the immune system, as well as the nervous
system. All of them were at first thought to be infectious diseases, usually
attributed to a new virus, just like AIDS.
Byrnes discovered that
the US immigration authorities treated all Haitian immigrants against parasites
with clioquinol, a benzene product. Incidentally the same drug has been heavily
marketed in Africa. Recent research by the physiologist and bio-physicist Dr.
Hulda Regehr Clark has furthermore established that precisely the combination
of benzene and certain common intestinal parasites will cause AIDS, as well as
various forms of cancer.
Kaposi's sarcoma was one
of the most typical symptoms of early AIDS cases among the gay population of
the US. However, it has never appeared among heterosexuals. So what is the
virus like, that distinguishes between homosexuals and heterosexuals?
Byrnes and Selvey discovered
that a new anal lubricant produced specially for the gay community was
introduced in 1978, barely two years before the first AIDS cases were reported.
It turns out that this lubricant contains benzene derivates, the absorption of
which was enhanced by "Poppers" (amyl nitrite), a drug US homosexuals
began using in the l970ies in order to increase sexual pleasure.
Pharmaceuticals taken via the rectum are often more effectively absorbed than
those taken orally; hence the use of suppositories in medicine.
It has further been
observed from inside the homosexual communities, that it was mostly the partner
who let himself be penetrated anally (i.e. the "passive" partner),
who fell ill, while the "active" partner often remained healthy. Also,
"passive" homosexuals were harder hit, the more sexually active they
were.
Finally, PIHP has shown
that for several years it was only in the USA that homosexuals came down with
Kaposi's sarcoma. Every AIDS patient outside of the US who developed Kaposi's
sarcoma was found to have spent at least a year or so in the US. Then, as the
new lubricant was made available by mail-order in European countries, Kaposi's
sarcoma started appearing there as well, but again only among homosexuals.
Professor Duesberg has
also pointed out the link between benzene derivates and the so called SMON
(Subacute Myelo-Optic Neuropathy) "epidemic" in Japan, for a long
time thought to be a virus infection but eventually proved to be caused by
Enterovioform, a drug for intestinal infections manufactured by Ciba-Geigy. A
Japanese researcher's claims to have isolated a SMON virus turned out to be
false. This "epidemic" went on for some 15 years and many thousands
of people became paralysed, demented, or died, from their medical prescription,
before the truth was discovered and the drug was finally outlawed in most
countries. I am wondering if it is still available in Africa.
Another benzene-derived
"epidemic" was the infamous Pellagra "plague" known since
the 18th century. In 1937 it was finally deemed to be caused by vitamin
deficiency and not bacteria as previously believed, but it did not disappear in
the US till the l970ies. It hit people on a basic corn diet, supposedly because
corn does not contain niacin, a vitamin of the B-complex necessary for vital
functions of the body, especially for the skin, nervous system and brain. A
link has now been established between pellagra and a bleaching agent containing
hexachloral benzene used to bleach corn flour in many parts of the US right
into the l970ies.
In 1981 yet another
"epidemic" broke out in Spain, the victims of which showed very
similar symptoms to those of AIDS. For a long time it was assumed that it was
an infectious disease caused by a virus, since it hit people in clusters within
the same family or social group. It took years of serious detective work to
establish that the cause was a contaminated cooking oil, sold by street
peddlers and not by regular shops. The oil had been diluted to lower the price
and widen the profit margin, and it contained benzene derivates. Many died,
others fell seriously ill in AIDS-like symptoms, including fever, night sweats,
muscle wasting, cough, cramps, pneumonia, hepatitis, cerebral oedemas,
neuropathy and multiple secondary infections.
Most insecticides
and pesticides, including anti-parasitic drugs, have a destructive effect on
the human immune system, and many such agents that were outlawed long ago in
Europe and the USA, are still promoted, sold, and indiscriminately used in
Africa.
To treat a state of chemical
poisoning with more poison makes no sense. Treating immune deficiency -
whatever its cause - with AZT or other forms of highly toxic chemotherapy that
kills off the remaining cells of an already damaged immune system, makes even
less sense. And yet, this is the ìtreatmentî imposed on innocent trusting
patients by our medical authorities.
In England the
manufacturer of AZT, then Burroughs Wellcome, was sued by the widow of a
hemophiliac, who died after 18 months on their drug. The point is that he was
diagnosed in 1985, and it is believed
that he became ìHIV-positiveî already in 1983, but he had no symptoms of any
kind and was in normal good health until he started taking AZT in August 1989.
His doctor insisted that
since he was HIV-positive, he would inevitably develop AIDS sooner or later,
and that he should take the drug in order to "delay the onset of
AIDS".Ý
A week after he began
taking AZT he became sick, and 18 months later he died of AIDS. The history of
AIDS is replete with similar cases.
While we are on the
subject of hemophiliacs, we find a little known anomaly: Very very few of the
wives of HIV-positive hemophiliacs have become HIV-positive. Now, if it is an
infectious disease transmitted by sexual intercourse, how come the wives of the
sick men are not infected?Ý And there is
more: From the pornographic film industry it is reported that many male so
called porn stars have died of AIDS, but their female partners seem to have
escaped unscathed, although many of them have been performing frequent
unprotected sex with these same men for years. This is another strong
indication that neither HIV, nor AIDS is spread by sexual intercourse.
THE
"VOODOO EFFECTî AND MENTAL DEPRESSION -
THE
MIND-BODY CONNECTION INÝ A I D S
When discussing the
various factors that contribute to the development of AIDS, we must not
underestimate the role of low self-esteem, emotional rejection, guilt, fear,
failure and loneliness, all of which cause mental-emotional depression, which
in turn is one of the most powerful factors to negatively affect the human
immune system.
As can be readily
appreciated, the mere pronunciation of the shameful HIV-AIDS diagnosis,
supposedly leading to an inescapable agonizing death while putting near and
dear at risk too, can have a devastating effect on the immune system, and may
then become a self-fulfilling prophesy and a death sentence, even without toxic
drugs.
Depression and drugs may
or may not be related. A depressed state of mind and low self-esteem is often
the reason for resorting to drugs in the first place. On the other hand,
falling into the habit of drug abuse in pursuit of pleasure, or from curiosity,
can lead to such depletion of available energy, typically through overload of
the adrenal glands, that a depressive state and a malfunctioning immune system
follows as the physiological result.
The two can also be
independent but coincident. For instance, someone having taken drugs for some
time, thereby straining the immune system, may be apparently doing allright
until s/he experiences the break-up of an emotional relationship, whether by
death or for other reasons, and sinks into a deep depression. Shortly
afterwards s/he is diagnosed with AIDS, and from then on a vicious circle
begins with no hope of survival. Or, the depression may be caused by the
diagnosis, resulting in the same vicious circle and death.
From the picture emerging
of the typical AIDS patient's situation, we now discern another co-factor to
take into account, that we may call subconscious programming.
It is actually not
uncommon for people to unconsciously program themselves to die. They may at
some point feel that the situation in which they find themselves is
unacceptable, and so they unconsciously commit a form of subtle suicide. Their
immune system stops functioning, and they die of some form of cancer, or from
what in AIDS is called an opportunistic infection. I have seen many examples of
this.
An HIV-AIDS diagnosis may
in fact be compared to certain black magic practices, such as Voodoo, when a
spell is cast on somebody who firmly believes in it. Accepting the validity of
the spell, the victim subconsciously programs him/her/self to die, and death
occurs as ordained. It can also be called a kind of fatal nocebo, i.e. a
negative placebo.
In the case of AIDS,
public hysteria works in two ways. For one thing it accentuates the social
alienation already experienced by homosexuals, prostitutes and drug addicts.
Once AIDS is diagnosed and becomes known, the victim is likely not only to lose
his job even if he is well enough to work, but also to be aggressively cut off
from normal social contacts. He would often be looked upon as an evil and
dangerous bringer of Death, which further accentuates his feeling of alienation
and hopelessness, and sinks him ever deeper into a depression.
At the same time he is
subjected to the general consensus that AIDS is incurable and that there is no
hope. Officially nobody has ever been cured of AIDS; it is just a waiting game.
Sooner or later - the maximum time suggested in the early days was about 5
years - death will come. This is the message the patient receives consciously
and unconsciously, day and night, from doctors and nurses, from family and
friends, from public media. The highly poisonous chemotherapy administered by
orthodox doctors and hospitals adds heavily to the load.
Even his close ones, who
see no hope, may begin to signal subliminally that they too suffer, that the
patient is a burden, and that since he has to die anyway, he might as well get
on with it. Sooner or later he will be so physically weak and emotionally
depressed that he just gives up, programs himself to die and accepts death as a
redeemer.
How can we expect anyone
to recover from AIDS under such circumstances? It takes superhuman psychological
strength and immutable independence of mind to fight such odds and recover. Yet
without "anti-viral" chemotherapy some have done it, though media
won't tell us about it. Officially they are quietly awaiting their time, even
after 20 years.
RUSSIAN ROULETTE - A SCIENTIFIC
GAME OF STATISTICS
One of the allegedly rock
solid pillars of medical science is statistics. Lay people possess a point of
view of their own, and popular wisdom has it that there are three kinds of lies
of progressive gravity: ordinary lies, damned lies, and - worst of all -
statistics. And there is no doubt that a clever statistician can work magics
with numbers and create the illusion of proving or disproving almost anything.
And equally that a not so clever statistician can very easily produce grossly
erroneous or biassed results unintentionally by just overlooking certain rules
for sampling or weighting the data.
I am a great admirer of
statistics for use by Governments in assessing demographic development, or by
insurance companies to calculate the size of their premiums, but to use it for
diagnosis and medical treatment of individual human beings is like playing
Russian roulette. However scientific that now may be.
Precisely with regard to
diagnosing AIDS, I have a dramatic illustration of this: The tests for HIV are
reported to be 98% accurate. By the way, it seems nobody has thought of asking
how this figure can be established, since there are no reliable controls. As
the rest of the ruling AIDS dogma, it is simply an article of faith. But let¥s
assume that it is correct. Since in our culture we are hypnotized by numbers
and quantities, percentages and majorities, this will sound very reassuring to
most people. But what can that statistical truth mean for individual people in
real life? Let's take an example.
In a sample of the
average American population, the estimate for HIV prevalence is in the order of
0.04%, or 4 per 10,000 people. Assuming we test 100,000 persons, we would then
expect to find 40 true HIV positive persons. This means that the remaining
99,960 persons are HIV negative. However, since the test is only 98% accurate,
it may falsely identify 2% of these
99,960 people as HIV positive. That is 1,999 persons! So out of 2,039 people
who may test positive, only 40 are actually positive. That means 98% of those
identified by the test as "HIV positive" are not positive at all. In
other words, the test, that is said to be 98% accurate and thus approved for
commercial use, is in fact 98% inaccurate, looked at from
the point of view of those who tested positive.
Imagine the fate of those 1,999 healthy people, who will be told they will get AIDS sooner or later and bullied, intimidated or seduced by the medical establishment into taking AZT to "delay the onset of AIDS". Quite apart from the enormous cost of this treatment (and profit to the pharmaceutical business), how many of them do you think will survive the ordeal? Such is the devilishly cruel scenario Gallo and the US medical authorities have set in motion: The whole population is scared into taking the test, and all who test positive are hard-sold the lethal AZT treatment, leading to certain death.
Incidentally, experience has shown that the same person may test negative or positive, depending on which laboratory is used, depending on the standards used, which differ from country to country, and from laboratory to laboratory. Even at the same laboratory, consecutive tests can come out differently for the same person. There is no so called ìgold standardî, and the manufacturers themselves warn that there is no secure test for HIV antibodies. In one trial, a person tested positive in two consecutive ELISA tests, then positive in one Western Blot test used as confirmation, but in a second Western Blot test he tested negative. The maximum test procedure ever used on patients in real life, is two ELISA and one Western Blot. As you can see, even this leaves room for doubt. And in most cases, only one test is performed, the supposedly less accurate ELISA test.
This shows how
life-threatening it can be to have a so called "AIDS test", which, as
we have seen, is nothing of the kind, but only a non-specific non-standardized
antibody test with no predictive value for the development of AIDS. Not only
can the medical establishment do nothing to save the unfortunate victims
declared positive, but in most cases it will do its best to demonstrate
"scientifically" through its treatment - and at exorbitant costs -
that HIV = AIDS = DEATH.
It doesn't take a mathematical genius to figure
out how many billions of dollars the pharmaceutical companies and their
collaborating doctors can make on such tests, that they try to frighten
everybody on the planet into taking. Far more than the 500 - 600 million
dollars a year that Wellcome's drug AZT has brought in on account of those
diagnosed as either HIV-positive or suffering from AIDS, practically all of
whom have died in agony, with not a single documented cure.
Judging from the hysterical hype and terror
whipped up by media around this invented "epidemic", the day may not
be far away, when the test will be enforced by law on the entire population,
with compulsory ìtreatment" for the unlucky ones who happen to test
positive.
Will there be any hope
for all those who get sucked into the official pharmaco-political profit mill
as HIV-suspects? - Effective dissemination of unbiased and honest information
to raise the awareness level of the people, and the use ofÝ holistic common sense seems to be the only way
out of the grand AIDS tragedy. It is nearly twenty years too late to avert it.
For an extensive bibliography and more than 850 articles with
impeccable scientific arguments, research results and penetrating discussions
of the AIDS syndrome by top level international scientists, go to the website of Rethinking AIDS: http://www.virusmyth.com
I
have a dream: That Truth and
Integrity, Common Sense and Compassion will eventually prevail over prejudice,
greed and power politics in medicine.