blablabla

Amen

HIV DENIAL OR INFORMED AIDS DISSENT?

DID YOU KNOW hundreds of dissenting or dissident scientists, including
Nobel Laureates and members of the National Academy of Sciences,
confirming alternative medicine's long questioning of the virus/germ mode
or 'one-cause, one-course' drug-based model, are calling into question the
dominant, conventional pharmaceutically-based scientific and medical
hypothesis for the alleged viral pathogenesis and progression of
'HIV=AIDS?'

BEYOND FLAT EARTH MEDICINE

How popular consensus and the medical establishment have often stubbornly
clung to the wrong ideas, unable to think outside the box. When medically
'correct' wasn't always.

A Brief History of Mismanaged Epidemics
[Disease]---[Popular Consensus]---[Actual Cause]

Scurvy------Contagious---Malnutrition: Vitamin C deficiency

Beri-beri---Contagious---Malnutrition: Thiamin deficiency

Maternal Fever---Non-contagious---Contagious: Unsanitary doctor practices

Influenza---Bacteria---Virus

Pellagra----Contagious---Malnutrition: Niacin deficiency

SMON(1950s-70s, Japan)---New Virus---Iatrogenic: Pharmaceutically induced

In science as in the law, the affirmative theory bears the burden of proof
for establishing itself. Those who critique it's establishment in fact,
are not required to reprove or replace another theory of it's aetiology,
especially when immune dysfunction has a multi-factorially influenced set
of unrelated conditions, or according to Alternative Medicine, all
illness/wellness is on a continuum and the result of immune sufficiency or
deficiency. Alternative Medicine has long questioned the virus/germ mode
or 'one-cause, one-course' drug-based model or theory of illness which is
confirmed by the work of hundreds of AIDS Dissident Scientists, including
Nobel Laureates, Members of the National Academy of Sciences and pioneers
in their fields. Many often disconnect the alternative theories of
diagnosis[PHILOSOPHY] from the alternative therapies of treatment
[PRACTISE]-- in how Alternative Medicine differentially diagnoses the
individual and treats using a holistic, multi-factorial or 'many-causes,
many-courses' approache to illness. They treat the underlying causes of
symptoms, not diagnosing/treating diseases and certainly not
diagnosing/treating syndromes, which are a 'catch-all' of redefined
classifications or catagories of conditions. And therefore, Alternative
Medicine does not generally recognize conventional disease
classifications.

"For disease, all experience shows, are adjectives, not noun
substantives."
"There are no specific diseases: there are [only] specific disease
conditions
[or states of dis-ease]."

Florence Nightingale (Nursing Pioneer, Disease Dissident)

Interesting that AIDS Apologists, or those who defend or defer to the
affirmative
statement or new theory, in this case the 'HIV=AIDS' hypothesis, often
compare AIDS
Dissidents with Flat Earthers, but Galileo was a Dissident, the Flat
Earthers were the
mainstream scientific establishment.

There is a famous story about Galileo, that is relevant here, I think.
Galileo was in
trouble with the Church authorities, for his observation of Jupiter's
moons, through his
telescope. (The four moons that he saw are traditionally called the
"Galilean" moons,
after their discoverer.) Anyway, he offered to let an influential member
of the Clergy
look through the telescope at these moons, so that said clergyman would
see what
Galileo had seen. This pious man refused, saying that as long as he did
not look, his
religious faith could remain intact.

Sadly, we are dealing with a kind of medical "church", regarding the HIV
theory; its
members do not want their faith shaken (or stirred! :-) )

Scurvy was thought to be transmitted by a microbe for 200 years even while
Dissident
Scientists were arguing it was a Vitamin C deficiency. The implication was
that Seamen
or Sailors engaged in 'buggary' were sexually transmissing a 'bug.'
Homosexuality was
deemed a psychiatric disorder by the medical and scientific establishment
until 1973, a
decade later the medical diagnosis of GRID-- Gay Related Immune
Dysfunction was
described in the literature.

'NATURAL' ALLIES to AIDS DISSIDENCE
http://groups.msn.com/AIDSMythExposed/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID
_Message=1582&LastModified=4675445024672392681

WHOSE ACCESS TO CARE?! [HHS estimates 50%-2/3 of those 'HIV/AIDS'
diagnosed in the West who have access to the drug cocktails are not in
"HIV Specialist" Conventional Care. ATTN: AIDS-Mart Shoppers or HIV
Consumers! It appears that many of those 'HIV disaffected' are shopping
around and not for conventional care. Introducing a model of competition
between conventional and alternative in our current model of monopoly in
health care, would help compare clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness.
Non-profit 'consumer' clients could sue for misrepresentation of claims of
serving the needs of all those 'HIV/AIDS' [mis] diagnosed]
http://forums.delphiforums.com/innocuous/messages?msg=812.1

PEER REVIEW REVIEWED
See especially: Little Evidence for Effectiveness of Scientific Peer
Review, British Medical Journal 326:241, February 1, 2003; Study
Faults Industry Clinical Trials: Company-backed Tests Rarely Follow
Guidelines, Report Finds; Associated Press, October 23, 2002, Trials
Funded by for Profit Organizations Favor the Intervention: The
British Medical Journal, August 3, 2002; 325:249; Scientists for
Sale, Health Editor The Guardian, Thursday February 7, 2002; Medical
Journal Eases Conflict Rules The Associated Press; Conflicts of
Interest in Medical Journals, AMA Journal Critiques Report Data,
Associated Press. Hidden Risks, Lethal Truths, Sunday Reporter, Los
Angeles Times June 30, 2002; Something Rotten at the Core of Science?
Trends in Pharmacological Sciences Vol. 22, No. 2, February 2001;
Definning Disease A review by Marilyn Werber Serafini, from National
Journal June 8, 2002: Pharmacracy.

INDEX OF ARTICLES IN MAINSTREAM PRESS INCLUDING THOSE LISTED:
http://www.questionaids.com/index.php?page=PeerReview

AIDS DISSIDENT SCIENTIFIC SUMMARY ANALYSIS  

what is hiv?  

No laboratory has ever obtained an undisputed sample of human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV), despite countless attempts. Most
laboratories, clinics and medical corporations have come to accept
indirect signs, or 'markers', such as antibody reactions, proteins,
genetic fragments, 'virus-like' particles, enzymes - that could suggest a
virus but also other things - as proving the presence and existence of an
'HIV'.  

If such a virus were ever isolated by standards applicable until the late
1970s, the expectations are that it would be a retrovirus - a concept of
viruses adopted in the early 1970s. The genetic code of a retrovirus would
work 'backwards' - 'retro' - transforming RNA to DNA. Most retroviruses
are known as harmless passenger viruses a part of all of endogenous or
naturally occuring genetic make-up. 'HIV' has never been found in
suficient quantities to kill T-Cells and in fact there is no concensus
even after 20+ years as to 'HIV's cytotoxic or cell killing mechanism. For
a decade, researchers thought cancer was caused by a retrovirus. Professor
Peter Duesberg, UC Berkeley, isolated the first retrovirus and is a Father
of Retrovirology says 'HIV' is a harmless passenger virus that does not
cause the syndrome known as 'AIDS.'  

In 1984 some signs suggesting a possible new virus were detected in cell
cultures by the scientific teams of Frenchman Luc Montagnier in Paris, and
American Robert Gallo in Washington, who were trying to explain a single
cause for 'AIDS'. The French called their findings Lymphadenopathy
Associated Virus (LAV), the Americans called theirs Human T-cell
Lymphotrophic Virus III (HTLV-III). The US Government announced at a press
conference in 1984 that a new virus was "the probable cause of AIDS," yet
before any scientific papers inviting peer scrutiny were published. When
such papers appeared in Science some weeks later, a dispute erupted
between Montagnier and Gallo. Gallo was found guilty of scientific
misconduct by a Senate Ethics Committee, for misappropriating material and
photographs of 'virus- like' particles from the French. Because of the
financial stakes - Gallo and the US government applied for a patent for
tests for 'HIV' the day of the press conference - the matter was
eventually solved only by a closed meeting between the scientists which
produced an official history of events, and a meeting between the US and
French Presidents.  

However, neither Gallo nor Montagnier ever managed to purify samples of
the virus they claimed to have detected. Many scientists believe that
without fulfiling this traditional primary requirement of virus isolation,
multiple confusions at the molecular biological level are inevitable over
what or whether anything has actually been found. To this day, primary
purification of 'HIV' has never been achieved. The last attempts,
published in 1997 in Virology, revealed proteins and genetic fragments
from microvesicles - sub-cell particles - but no virus.  

hiv antibody tests  

INDEX OF ARTICLES, PAPERS
http://www.healtoronto.com/hivtest.html

Over the years of the HIV/AIDS theory, different types of test have been
used to try to detect such a virus in patients. These have included (1)
antibody tests, which look for a reaction in a person's blood between
their natural antibodies and synthetic proteins said to belong to HIV, and
(2) Polymerase Chain Reaction - PCR - or 'viral load' genetic tests, which
purport to use part of the virus' genetic code to detect its presence.  

All these tests are indirect, or surrogate. They do not claim to detect
any whole virus. Rather, they use markers to infer whether a virus might
be present. Unfortunately for the accuracy of these tests, these same
markers can be found in a variety of non-HIV situations. No HIV test of
any kind has ever been validated against the one measure that is not
indirect - the gold standard: physical virus isolation. This is because
isolation of HIV by the previously conventional standards of viral
isolation has never been achieved, despite numerous attempts.  

Of the antibody tests for HIV, there are two main types - called ELISA,
and Western Blot. Neither was designed especially for HIV, but are
examples of laboratory methodologies used in many investigations. Around
the world many companies market their versions of the ELISA and Western
Blot antibody tests for HIV.  

However, the uncertain, unvalidated nature of these tests is reflected in
the product literature supplied by their manufacturers.  

A typical example for the ELISA reads:  

"At present there is no recognised standard for establishing the presence
or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood." - Axsym
System, Abbott Laboratories  

A typical example for the Western Blot reads:  

"Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosis of HIV-1 infection." -
Epitope, Organon Teknika  

Neither Isolation Nor Validation

Any scientist who declares that a genetic sequence, moreover a genetic
sequence arrived at by human concensus, represents a naturally occuring
virus, has compromised their scientific integrity. To further suggest that
this genetic sequence represents a unique, exogenous, sexually transmitted
and indeed pathogenic retrovirus is to enter the
realms of pseudo-science. Without HIV isolation all is mere speculation.
Even if HIV were isolated and the proteins tested for by the ELISA
antibody test were actually proteins specific to HIV, an antibody test
would still not be accurate enough for determining
actual viral infection. Everyone tests HIV positive on ELISA if their
serum is not diluted by a factor of 400 because of non-specific antibodies
which bind to any proteins.

"Of course we looked for it [HIV]... We saw some particles but they did
not have the morphology [shape] typical of retroviruses. ... I repeat we
did not purify."  
 ~ Dr. Luc Montagnier, the "discoverer of HIV"  
   (see French transcript of quote from the interview
http://healtoronto.com/lmfrench.html, Did Luc Montagnier Discover HIV?
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/dtinterviewlm.htm or video)  

"No one believed we really had that many isolates... No one believed we
really meant that..."  
  ~ Dr. Robert Gallo, also discovered "HIV"  
   (see Gallo Investigated http://healtoronto.com/galloindex.html)  

'viral load' / PCR test  

Polymerase Chain Reaction - PCR - or the 'viral load' test, purports to
detect, and quantify, blood-borne HIV in patients. However, the genetic
fragments it amplifies have never been proved to originate in HIV, or in
any virus. The accuracy of PCR viral load is estimated by leading doctors
at plus or minus 300% - i.e. a reading of 90,000 could be 30,000 or
270,000!  

The PCR was not invented for HIV. Its Nobel Prizewinning inventor, Dr Kary
Mullis, calls the use of PCR in AIDS medicine, "a tragedy in the practice
of Western medicine" and a "viral load of crap."  

The uncertain unvalidated nature of the PCR for HIV is reflected in the
product literature supplied by manufacturers. A typical example reads:  

"The Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor test is not intended to be used as a screening
test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV
infection." - Roche, Amplicor  

VIRAL LOAD OF WHAT?
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/index/kmullis.htm
 

t-cells  

Since the beginning of the HIV/AIDS theory, it has been suggested that a
virus kills a certain type of cell of the immune system - called T-cells,
or CD4 cells. 'T' refers to the maturing of these cells in the gland of
the Thymus, after their birth in the bone marrow. CD4 is short for Cluster
Differentiation 4, referring to a method by which scientists group subsets
of these cells according to protein markers on their surface.  

In fact there has never been any proof that an HIV kills these cells, or
indeed that even when they seem in low numbers in a person's blood, cells
have not instead migrated out of the blood to bone marrow and elsewhere.
Despite common assumptions, even by doctors, CD4/T-cell counting remains a
poor predictor of wellness and illness. Since the Berlin World AIDS
Conference of 1992 considerably less scientific importance has been
attached to T-cell counting. T-cell counts are naturally variable, within
an individual over time, between individuals, and between communities. The
technology for counting T-cells is accurate only to approximately plus or
minus 100 cells. The cells sampled for counting are taken from a person's
peripheral blood, where it is widely accepted, less than 10% of a healthy
person's T-cells will ever be found.  

CD-4 T-cells: What Do They Count For? [index of articles/papers]
http://healtoronto.com/cd4counts.html

what is aids?  

Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is a medical diagnosis applied
since 1984 in some branches of medicine and the wider public when a person
perceived as infected with a human immunodeficiency virus ('HIV')
experiences one of 29 conditions. But all of the 29 conditions exist or
occur in persons diagnosed 'HIV' antibody negative and are only redefined
as 'AIDS' when someone tests antibody positive.

'Acquired' specifies that the diagnosis does not apply to people with
inherent immune deficiencies. 'Immune Deficiency' is conventionally taken
to be the inability of a person's body to protect against illness.
Syndrome is a group of symptoms or conditions which seem to be more or
less linked.  

The growing list of conditions defined 'in the presence of HIV infection'
since 1984 as AIDS, have already all been known for decades. Thus TB plus
'HIV' is AIDS, TB without 'HIV' is TB. Cervical cancer plus 'HIV' is AIDS,
without is cervical cancer. Etc.  

In the early 1980s the 'AIDS-indicator' conditions numbered two:
pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (thought to be caused by an opportunistic
protozöon, now thought to be fungal), and Kaposi's Sarcoma (a quasi-cancer
of the skin and other membranes, first reported in 1887). These two
conditions were found increasingly frequently in the early 1980s in the
USA and Europe in men having sex with men, and were hypothesised as
resulting from infectious immune deficiency, inferred from counting
people's peripheral T-cells.  

The syndrome was for a while classified as Gay Related Immune Deficiency
(GRID). The list of 'defining' conditions has increased substantially
since 1984, though the major risk groups for 'AIDS' in the West have
remained men who have sex with men, people with haemophilia (Haemophilia),
and IV drug users (Drugs). Despite early alarms, HIV/AIDS has never become
a heterosexual epidemic in the West, which does not mean it's a gay
disease, but it has failed to meet the parameters of the infectious model.
'HIV=AIDS' does not fulfill Koch's Postulates as none of the apes injected
with 'HIV' have developed 'AIDS' conditions.  

The international CDC definition of AIDS is specifically founded on  
'infection with HIV', assumed or demonstrated. Thus by definition it is
nearly impossible to have 'AIDS' that is not 'correlative' with 'HIV',
though it is widely accepted that 'Immune Deficiency' can be 'Acquired' in
a many ways. There are also many well documented causes and treatments for
all of the 29 'AIDS' redefined conditons or for addressing aquired immune
deficiency.

Between different regions of the globe, the criteria and means for
arriving at an AIDS diagnosis vary. There are at least seven varying
official criteria for diagnosing 'AIDS.'  

In Africa, for example, the same official concept of AIDS can be found,
but since a meeting in 1985 in the city of Bangui, Cote d'Ivoire, the
World Health Organisation's Bangui AIDS Definition has allowed for
diagnosis of AIDS in Africa with no test performed for 'HIV', if a person
experiences the relatively common African symptoms of weight loss, cough,
fever and diarrhoea for more than a month.  

HIV cannot be the cause of AIDS. Why would a virus infect 1% of the US
population and 30% of some Africa countries? Why would a virus cause
different symptoms depending on your age, gender, and location? Why hasn't
20 years worth of research and billions of dollars spent created a vaccine
or "cure"? Why do the pharmaceutical companies and the government censor
the scientists, doctors and laypeople that ask these questions and provide
reasonable answers?

The infectious model does not work that way. See how 'HIV=AIDS' unfills
Kochs' Three Postulates of the Infectious Model of Disease. This is why
there will never be an 'AIDS' vaccine or cure for 'AIDS' or a manner to
prevent transmission of the alleged 'HIV.'

'AIDS' IN AFRICA INDEX OF PAPERS, ARTICLES
http://healtoronto.com/africa.html

HIV Epidemiology or Epidemio-illogic: An AIDS Numbers Game
http://forums.delphiforums.com/innocuous/messages?msg=606.1

WHOSE ACCESS TO CARE?! AIDS ACTION OR AIDS INACTION?
[HHS estimates 50%-2/3 of those 'HIV/AIDS' diagnosed in the West who have
access to the drug cocktails are not in "HIV Specialist" Conventional
Care. ATTN: AIDS-Mart Shoppers or HIV Consumers! It appears that many of
those 'HIV disaffected' are shopping around and not for conventional care.
Introducing a model of competition between conventional and alternative in
our current model of monopoly in health care, would help compare clinical
efficacy and cost effectiveness. Non-profit consumers could sue for
misrepresentation of claims of service, allegedly providing for the needs
of all those 'HIV/AIDS' diagnosed]
http://forums.delphiforums.com/innocuous/messages?msg=812.1

==========================================
RESOURCES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION  
==========================================

The GROUP for the SCIENTIFIC REAPPRAISAL  
of the HIV/AIDS HYPOTHESIS  [100s of pages of articles, papers]
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/find.htm

BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL [BMJ]
MODERATED ONLINE DEBATE ON HIV/AIDS
http://bmj.com/cgi/eletters/326/7387/495

[Especially note referenced contributions of The Perth Group of
Austrailian AIDS Dissident Scientists, lead by biophysicist Eleni
Papadopulos-Eleopulos, whose other extensive archives are found here
http://www.theperthgroup.com
and here: http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/perthgroup/]

Roberto Giraldo, MD
President of The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS
Hypothesis http://www.robertogiraldo.com/eng/papers/papers.html

TREATING AND PREVENTING ILLNESS ATTRIBUTED TO OR ASSOCIATED WITH "AIDS"
http://www.robertogiraldo.com/eng/papers/TreatingAndPreventingAIDS.html

REBUTTAL TO NIAID/NIH "Evidence for HIV" DOCUMENT
http://www.healtoronto.com/nih

INTERNATIONAL AIDS PANEL, INTERIM REPORT  
Synthesis of deliberations by the panel of experts invited by the
President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki and the ten experiments the Panel
designed in attempt to resolve the controversy, endorsed by the African
National Congress [AIDS Dissidents/'Denialists' and AIDS
Apologists/Orthodoxy]
http://www.polity.org.za/govdocs/reports/aids/aidspanel.htm

REBUTTAL TO DURBAN DECLARATION http://thedurbandeclaration.org/

HEAL [Health Education AIDS Liason]  
http://www.healtoronto.com
 

ANOTHER LOOK [Breastfeeding and 'HIV/AIDS']
http://www.anotherlook.org

MOMM [Mothers Opposing Mandatory Medicine]
http://www.informedmomm.com

AIDS MYTH EXPOSED
[Largest AIDS forum on MSN] http://www.aidsmythexposed.com

HIV/AIDS ALTERNATIVE VIEWS
[Largest AIDS forum on Delphi] http://forums.delphiforums.com/innocuous

SIGN and READ SIGNATORIES OF THE ONLINE PETITION TO SUPPORT SOUTH AFRICAN
PRESIDENT THABO MBEKI's SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH ABOUT THE DEFINITION,
DIAGNOSIS, CAUSATION AND PREVENTION OF
'HIV/AIDS:'http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/news/mbeki.htm