Anatomy of an Epidemic - the HIV/AIDS story is being rewritten

[Brocke]

House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic



http://www.houseofnumbers.com/site/

The HIV/ AIDS Story is Being Rewritten
In House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic, an AIDS film like no other, the HIV/AIDS story is being rewritten. This is the first film to present the uncensored POVs of virtually all the major players; in their own settings, in their own words. It rocks the foundation upon which all conventional wisdom regarding HIV/AIDS is based. House of Numbers could well be the opening volley in a battle to bring sanity and clarity to an epidemic gone awry.

"Leung manages to present a barrage of intriguing theories debunking our generally accepted beliefs... There's no denying, however, the value of exploring such game-changing topics as how HIV-infection numbers are cooked for monetary and political gain; how the effects of global poverty may have led to so many AIDS-related deaths; how such widely used AIDS drugs as AZT have, themselves, often proved fatal; and whether HIV really exists."
Gary Goldstein, Los Angeles Times

House of Numbers is 89 minutes long, but for every minute in the documentary there exists nearly four times as much footage that could not be included in the optimum time-frame for a feature-length film. Drawing on this resource, the special Deluxe Edition explores in greater depth and more exacting detail the issues raised in the Standard DVD. This previously unseen footage brings into sharper focus the controversies and the cast of characters comprising the HIV/AIDS narrative; making it compelling viewing for anyone engaged by this fascinating and fateful "anatomy of an epidemic."


Interviewees include:

Donald Abrams, MD
San Francisco, CA, USA
Chief, Hematology-Oncology, San Francisco General Hospital

David Baltimore, PhD
Pasadena, CA, USA
Director, Baltimore Laboratory, Caltech
1975 Nobel Prize Winner for Discovering Reverse Transcriptase

Françoise Barré-Sinoussi, PhD
Paris, France
2008 Nobel Prize Winner for Discovering HIV
Director, Regulation of Retroviral Infections Unit,
Institut Pasteur

James Chin, MD, MPH
Berkeley, CA, USA
Epidemiologist

Kenneth Cole
New York, NY, USA
Chairman, Board Of Trustees, amfAR

Niel Constantine, PhD
Baltimore, MD, USA
Director, Clinical Immunology, Institute of Human Virology,
University of Maryland Medical System

James Curran, MD
Atlanta, GA, USA
Dean, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University

Martin Delaney
San Francisco, CA, USA
Founding Director, Project Inform
(Dec 9, 1945 - Jan 23, 2009)

Peter Duesberg, PhD
Berkeley, CA, USA
Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology

Anthony S. Fauci, MD
Bethesda, MD, USA
Director, National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Christian Fiala, MD, PhD
Vienna, Austria
Medical Director, Gynmed Clinic

Jim Fouratt
New York, NY, USA
Independent Scholar/Cultural Critic/Activist

Donald P. Francis, MD, DSc
San Francisco, CA, USA
Director, Global Solutions for Infectious Diseases

Robert C. Gallo, MD
Baltimore, MD, USA
Director, Institute of Human Virology

Hans R. Gelderblom, MD, PhD
Berlin, Germany
Electron Microscopist

Michael Gottlieb, MD
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Credited as first doctor to diagnose AIDS
A Founding Chairman of amfAR
 
Harry Haverkos, MD
Bethesda, MD, USA
Former Associate Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

Harold Jaffe, MD
Oxford, United Kingdom
Professor of Public Health

Criselda Kananda
Johannesburgh, South Africa
Talk Radio Host / Motivational Speaker

Claus Koehnlein, MD
Kiel, Germany
Physician

Claudia Kücherer, MD
Berlin, Germany
Molecular Biologist

Daniel R. Kuritzkes, MD
Boston, MA, USA
Professor of Medicine

Prof. Reinhard Kurth, MD
Berlin, Germany
President, Robert Koch Institute 1996 - 2008

Jay Levy, MD
San Francisco, CA, USA
Director, Laboratory for Tumor and AIDS Virus Research, University of California, San Francisco

Joseph McCormick, MD
Brownsville, TX, USA
Assistant Dean, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Brownsville

Professor Luc Montagnier, MD
Paris, France
2008 Nobel Prize Winner for Discovering HIV

John P. Moore, PhD
New York, NY, USA
Professor of Microbiology and Immunology, Weill Cornell Medical College 

Kary Mullis, PhD
Newport Beach, CA, USA
1993 Nobel Prize Winner in Chemistry

Nancy Padian, PhD, MPH
San Francisco, CA, USA
Director, Women's Global Health Imperative
Senior Prevention Consultant, Pangaea Global AIDS Foundation

Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, MSc
& Dr. Valendar Turner, MD
Perth, Australia
The Perth Group

Peter Piot, MD, PhD
London, England
Director, Institute for Global Health, Imperial College, London

Robert R. Redfield, MD
Baltimore, MD, USA
Director of Clinical Care and Research

Joe Sonnabend, MD
London, England
Co-founder amfAR

Robin Weiss, PhD
London, England
Professor of Viral Oncology

[RonPaulRocks]

This link is the whole film in excellent quality.

http://vodpod.com/watch/4695991-house-of-numbers

[charrington]

This video from Greece seconds the findings --- very interesting.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCGVZ6oWoTA

[charrington]

This link is the whole film in excellent quality.

http://vodpod.com/watch/4695991-house-of-numbers

thanks for that link .. very good.

[Polaris]

Guys we need to confront Alex Jones on this, because he keeps saying AIDS is a bioweapon. We should get him to read Mike Adams' article on this. I cant believe people are dying from this stupid made up sh*t.

[charrington]

Guys we need to confront Alex Jones on this, because he keeps saying AIDS is a bioweapon. We should get him to read Mike Adams' article on this. I cant believe people are dying from this stupid made up sh*t.

You know this isn't the only disease or aliment that this is happening to...  That's what's really sad. That's how screwed up everything is.

There are so many things happening at once it's impossible to untangle them all ---

[RonPaulRocks]

Yes I would also like to know if Alex Jones has watched this.  He really needs to interview Dr. Deusberg.

[RonPaulRocks]

http://vodpod.com/watch/4695991-house-of-numbers

Watch it, full film!

[Satyagraha]

This is medical terrorism on a global scale. The biggest transmitter of HIV is the pharma/medical/political establishment via their massive PR campaign of fear mongering.

There is NO TEST that can positively confirm the presence of HIV in anyone.

At 42:14 minutes into this video:

In a TEN-YEAR STUDY
conducted using a test sample of people who were HIV positive and their non-HIV positive sex partners to measure transmission of the "world's most virulent, terrifying sexually transmitted disease" from infected to non-infected persons showed that

NOBODY GOT THE AIDS VIRUS. ZERO PEOPLE.
"Nobody who was negative came up positive."




Billions and billions of dollars pour into the HIV/AIDS global economic bubble.
People are filled with fear by design: the more fear you create, the more money pours in.
The biggest 'spread' of HIV/AIDS is in the foundations/agencies/NGO groups and experts that grow exponentially.
Think of the millions of people who are walking around with a 'diagnosis' of being HIV infected: lives destroyed by the need to ramp up the numbers to support the lie.

What a massive hoax: brought to the world by the people who brought us Global Warming, Al-Qaeda, and peak oil.

[Satyagraha]

Duesberg on the AZT hoax:

The Cure That Failed
http://www.duesberg.com/articles/tbcure.html
By Tom Bethell
National Review 10 May 1993

Did the AIDS lobby know what it was doing when it pressed the government to approve AZT?

Lindsey Nagel was born in Petrosani, Rumania, in October 1990. She was adopted by a Minneapolis couple, Cheryl and Steve Nagel, who brought her back to the States later that year. Within a few weeks, they were dismayed to find that she had tested positive for HIV. Although she showed no symptoms of disease, the Nagels' doctor put her on Retrovir syrup, otherwise known as AZT. In response to protests by homosexual activists this drug had been hurriedly approved by the FDA in 1987. "The government bends to AIDS victims' pleas," was the way U.S. News & World Report headlined a critical story at the time.

Over the next 18 months Lindsey's general health declined. She became "hyperactive," as though "she did not feel comfortable in her body," according to her father. She did not eat properly, avoided milk, and suffered from nausea and diarrhea. Then, in October 1992, things took a turn for the worse. Night after night she woke up screaming. Her parents would find her half sitting up in bed, clutching at her knees and thighs. Sometimes this would happen twice a night.

A month or so before this turn of events, the Nagels had read a couple of magazine articles about Peter Duesberg, a virologist at UC Berkeley. Duesberg says that HIV does not cause AIDS, and that AZT is toxic and not a rational treatment for AIDS. The Nagels wanted to know more, so they wrote and told him about the treatment their daughter was receiving.

"Take her off AZT immediately if you want to see her live," Duesberg wrote back. "Your daughter will die from it, like Kimberly Bergalis, if you continue the treatment."

Kimberly Bergalis was believed to have been infected with HIV by her dentist in Florida. She had a yeast infection, which is common among women, but it is also one of the "indicator diseases" within the Centers for Disease Control's ever-expanding definition of AIDS. (First defined in 1982, AIDS was redefined more and more inclusively in 1984, 1985, 1987, and 1993.) With a yeast infection plus HIV, Miss Bergalis became an AIDS patient by definition, and was duly prescribed AZT. Within a year she was in a wheelchair (as was Rudolf Nureyev toward the end of his life, and he, too, took AZT). Among its other side-effects, AZT causes myopathy, or muscle atrophy. Miss Bergalis died in 1991.

Arthur Ashe also took AZT. After his death, New York Daily News columnist Earl Caldwell reported that Ashe had "wanted to" break away from his treatment, but was worried about giving offense. "What will I tell my doctors?" he said to a friend. Michael Callen, the author of Surviving AIDS, claims that the only long-term AIDS survivors are those who have not taken AZT. Larry Kramer, HIV-positive gay playwright, and unremitting scourge of the government when it doesn't seem to be doing enough, says that AZT is not for him.

AZT was designed in 1964 as chemotherapy for cancer. But it was never approved, because of its side-effects. With an AIDS cure much in demand, it was retrieved from the storage room. After toxicity and efficacy trials seemed to show that it did some good, at least in the short run, the FDA gave the drug its seal of approval. "From a failed cancer medication to the only fully approved AIDS treatment, AZT has made an astonishing comeback," Discover reported in 1990.

Chemotherapy prevents cells from dividing by fooling cellular DNA into accepting a chain-terminator into the DNA chain. It's like putting a caboose (with no rear coupling) into the middle of a freight train that was supposed to incorporate many more cars. Now the train cannot expand beyond the caboose because there's nothing to hook onto.

The problem with chemotherapy is that it stops all cells from dividing, not just cancer cells. Science hasn't been able to figure out a way for it to zero in on the cancer exclusively. Cancer cells divide rapidly, but so do stomach cells and bone-marrow cells and lots of other cells. The formation of new DNA chains is stopped within all of them. That's why long-term chemotherapy is very destructive.

The same problem arises with AZT. The drug doesn't know how to find just the HIV-infected cells (assuming, arguendo, that HIV really does cause AIDS). And that's why Duesberg wrote in a recent article that AZT "must be the most toxic drug ever approved for indefinite therapy in America." Nonetheless, about 100,000 people are now taking it. One is Jeffrey Schmalz, the New York Times reporter who has AIDS. Many people report early beneficial effects from AZT. And Schmalz told me that the drug had saved his life. "The problem is long range," he said, "because it begins to eat away at your system."

What about the efficacy and toxicity studies? Here I warn NR readers that I shall make a "left wing" point, but I wouldn't bother to do so if the news media had shown any interest in it. Surprisingly, they have not. Many of the AZT studies have been funded by the company that makes AZT, Burroughs Wellcome. This was true of the "double-blind, placebo-controlled trials" in 1986 that led to FDA approval of the drug. The results of these trials were published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 1987.

I called Jerome Kassirer, the editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, to ask him about "scientific etiquette" with respect to publishing studies funded by the manufacturers of the thing studied. He said that the NEJM's policy was very simple-disclosure. "We disclose, typically on the cover page, what the relationship [of the study] is to the company," he said. And indeed, with the AZT toxicity study, it plainly says on the cover page: "Supported by the Burroughs Wellcome Company....." Likewise the efficacy study includes among its many co-authors "the AZT Collaborative Working Group," which, if you read the fine print, also on the cover page, includes five scientists from the Burroughs Wellcome Company.

"If we have a scientific study," Kassirer said, "we have to assume that the data are the data."

Would The New England Journal publish a smoking study funded by Philip Morris? I asked. "In principle, we might publish it," he said. "But it would have to pass the same kind of scientific standards as any other study."

Flawed Tests

What are those standards? When are the data not the data? Joan Shenton, who produced a program critical of AZT shown in Britain last February, published a letter in The Lancet claiming that "both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and trial investigators knew that the two trials [mentioned above] had become unblinded." (FDA documents, obtained through Freedom of Information procedure, had disclosed this information.) The patients figured out who was receiving the drug and who was receiving a placebo, and those receiving the drug shared it with those who were not.

Furthermore the trials, planned for 24 weeks, were ended "after an average of only 17 weeks," according to Miss Shenton. It has since come out that 30 (of 145) AZT recipients were kept alive by blood transfusions to compensate for severe bone-marrow toxicity. Burroughs Wellcome concedes "the drug has been studied for limited periods of time and long-term safety and efficacy are not known." The New Scientist reported in 1991 that "there are serious, unanswered questions about its long-term effects."

In early April came the results of a three-year European study of early use of AZT with HIV-infected individuals-the Concorde trials. One group was given AZT immediately; the other, not until they developed symptoms. (It has not been reported how the subjects were chosen, but it is a reasonable assumption that many were drug-users.) The study therefore did not test the efficacy of AZT itself, because most subjects seem to have ended up taking the drug. But early use was shown to have no beneficial effects, and the fine print in The Lancet showed that significantly more of the early users experienced anemia, low white-blood-cell counts, nausea, and vomiting than the late-use group.

The researchers (in Britain and France) came under pressure to stop the study early-as three out of four comparable U.S. studies have been. In Britain, Lawrence K. Altman reported in the New York Times, "health officials are less influenced by pressure from advocacy groups." It's almost as though officials here don't want to know the truth. Even more surprising is that gay activists should have so much faith in government science. The very effectiveness of their protests have shown just how easily government science can be politicized.

What happened to young Lindsey? As soon as the Nagels received Duesberg' s letter, they discontinued her AZT. Her condition immediately improved. "It was dramatic, almost overnight," Cheryl Nagel told me. She stopped crying out in the middle of the night. Her leg cramps ceased. She became much calmer. Her food intake almost doubled. She happily drank the milk that she used to reject. And since then she has gained over five pounds. More recently her mother has spent a good deal of time in the University of Minnesota's medical library, trying to figure out why Lindsey was prescribed AZT in the first place. The label published by Burroughs Wellcome does not "indicate" the use of AZT with asymptomatic infants. At the end of March, the Nagels filed a complaint with the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice, but they do not expect that much will come of it. An FDA official told them that once a drug has been approved by the FDA, "it can be prescribed for dandruff." *

Mr. Bethell, a National Review contributor, is Washington correspondent for The American Spectator.

[Satyagraha]

The stigma associated with having the HIV/AIDS diagnosis is life-altering and devastating.
People lose jobs, get evicted from their apartments, lose relationships and basically become pariahs of society.
All because of the massive fear-mongering campaign. Because of a PR engine that Bernays would have been proud of.

This much is clear:

THERE IS NO TEST THAT CAN CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF THE HIV VIRUS.
THERE IS NO PROOF THAT HIV CAUSES AIDS.

What we do know:

AIDS IS A MASSIVE MONEY-MAKER.
The Diagnosis of "AIDS" destroys peoples lives.

Until we allow scientists to research the co-factors of what we call AIDS, we will never know what is behind this virus, or supposed virus. Until the scientific community grows some cojones, and bucks the pressure from pharma, the WHO, the CDC, and what Duesberg calls the "prostitutes" who develop scientific 'evidence' to generate research funding (Sound familiar? Sounds like the global warming scam, yes?), we'll never know.

And people are sick and dying of something we call HIV/AIDS. What it is, how you get it, how to treat it, a CURE - all impossible to know until science becomes ethical and scientists stop prostituting themselves on behalf of the medical terrorist complex and the pharma terrorist complex.

=============================

A Great Future Behind It
The Yin and Yang of HIV
http://www.theperthgroup.com/POPPAPERS/yinyang.html
By Valendar Turner & Andrew McIntyre
Published over three issue of NEXUS Magazine beginning January 1999

SUMMARY

The notion that HIV/AIDS is infectious and sexually transmitted is based on a relationship between antibodies claimed specifically induced by a retrovirus HIV and particular diseases in certain risk groups.

However, the HIV theory has been challenged for well over a decade in many scientific publications, principally by Peter Duesberg from the USA and Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos and her colleagues in Australia.

Failure of HIV/AIDS to spread beyond the original risk groups, and particularly to Western heterosexuals, especially non-drug using prostitutes, signals that the HIV theory of AIDS is in need of urgent reappraisal. This has serious implications for both the way science has been conducted and public health policy and planning. The HIV theory has cost billions of dollars and locked in enormous amount of energy in research by thousands of scientists worldwide. So far, it has yet to save a single life. There is an urgent need to establish a truly independent, and distinguished international committee to review the current theories and those that challenge them.

There needs to be a co-operative but urgent reassessment of AIDS.

A theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements:
It must accurately describe a large class of observations
on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements,
and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations.

-- Stephen Hawking

A BRIEF HISTORY

A Nobel Laureate stirs the waters

In 1988 Dr. Kary Mullis, the 1993 Nobel prize winner for Chemistry was employed by the US National Institutes for Health (NIH) to set up analyses for HIV testing. When preparing his report he asked a virologist colleague for a reference that HIV is "the probable cause of AIDS". He was told he did not need one. Mullis was surprised.(1)

"I disagreed. It was totally remarkable to me that the individual who had discovered the cause of a deadly and as-yet-uncured disease would not be continually referenced in the scientific papers until that disease was cured and forgotten… There had to be a published paper, or perhaps several of them, which taken together indicated that HIV was the probable cause of AIDS". Otherwise, as Mullis was forced to conclude, "The entire campaign against a disease increasingly regarded as the twentieth-century Black Death was based on a hypothesis whose origins no one could recall. That defied both scientific and common sense".
A decade later Mullis was to write, "I finally understood why I was having so much trouble finding the references that linked HIV to AIDS. There weren’t any".(2) Indeed, an interested non-specialist observer, armed with a few contacts and a good library, merely has to scratch the surface to realise that the HIV theory of AIDS begs many more questions than it answers.(1-63 *)
 
The beginnings of AIDS

The few years leading up to the AIDS era and the discovery of HIV are illuminating. It was a time when a promiscuous minority of young, "liberated", gay men in a few large American cities were increasingly developing previously uncommon diseases such as fatal forms of the malignancy Kaposis' sarcoma and a fungal pneumonia known as PCP. At the time, whilst it was reasonable to implicate an infectious microbe transmitted by rampant, indiscriminant sexual practices interspersed with needle sharing drug taking, the fact that immune suppression had multiple causes was also known in 1981. Some considered the diseases resulted from multiple assaults to bodily functions caused by the many and varied diseases, toxins and treatments that accompanied the gay and drug taking lifestyle that had evolved during the late 1970s.

Just how extensive these multiple assaults were was indicated by the English journalist Neville Hodgkinson documenting the range of infections of just one homosexual, the late Michael Callen in his book "AIDS The failure of contemporary science: How a virus that never was deceived the world".(29) "Non-specific urethritis, hepatitis A, more NSU and gonorrhoea, amoebas [intestinal parasites]-and hepatitis B, more NSU and gonorrhoea, more amoebas, shigella, non-A, non-B hepatitis, giardia, anal fissures, syphilis, more gonorrhoea [penile, anal and oral], gonorrhoea, shigella twice, more amoebas, herpes simplex types I and II; venereal warts, salmonella; chlamydia; cytomegalovirus (CMV); Epstein-Barr virus (EBV); mononucleosis and cryptosporidiosis", ("a disease of cattle!"). Indeed, an early US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) study confirmed that the first 100 men with AIDS had a median lifetime number of 1120 sex partners.(30) As Callen himself put it, "I got some combination of venereal diseases EACH AND EVERY TIME I had sex". Not surprisingly, given the widespread belief of a causal relationship between immunity and the maintenance of health, in 1981 the "new" disease became known as Gay Related Immune Deficiency (GRID). In fact none of the diseases was new. Some were known to occur in drug addicts and haemophiliacs long before the AIDS era. What was "new" was their exponentially escalating prevalence in gay men.
 
Technology and Virology

Coincidental with the beginning of the AIDS era a technique was developed to classify and count the different types of lymphocyte white blood cells. It was noticed that some AIDS patients had diminished numbers of the so called T4 "helper" cell subtype and, despite lack of proof, the cells were assumed to be dying at the behest of an agent selectively targeting them. This became the "hallmark" of AIDS as well as forming a measure of the amount of immune deficiency. In turn, this "immune deficiency", (the "AID" in AIDS) caused the diseases (the "S" in AIDS) that constitute the clinical syndrome. The perceptions that T4 cells were dying and AIDS was infectious led to the theory that AIDS is caused by a microbial organism.

Five years prior to the AIDS era a few laboratories around the world were drawing towards the end of a fruitless search to prove a viral cause for human cancers. During the 1970s, Dr. Robert Gallo, the central figure as "co-discoverer" of the AIDS virus, and his colleagues, claimed to have discovered three human retroviruses. (The name ‘retroviruses’ arises because of the copying of the RNA which forms the viral "genes" [the genome] "backwards" into DNA, a direction contrary to that long considered universal, that is, from DNA into RNA). In 1975 the first human retrovirus, HL23V, was proposed to cause human leukaemia but by 1980 was considered an embarrassing mistake, in fact not to have ever existed. Of the remaining two, one was postulated to cause a specific though rare form of adult leukaemia and the second is still without a disease. What is significant is that the latter two retroviruses are said to exhibit a liking for T4 lymphocytes. This led Donald Francis and Gallo and others to propose that an existing or closely related retrovirus was the agent responsible for killing the T4 cells in AIDS patients. When researchers actively sought and then discovered the same diseases in individuals who were not gay, retroviruses, as well as retrovirologists, received renewed interest and GRID became AIDS.
 
(continued next post)

[Satyagraha]

(continued from previous post)

First proclamations

In May 1983 Professor Luc Montagnier and his colleagues at the Pasteur Institute of Paris published a paper in Science entitled, "Isolation of a T-Lymphotrophic Retrovirus from a patient at Risk for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).(64) It is important to note that the first word in this paper, ‘Isolation’, serves as a signal that the researcher is claiming proof for the existence of a new virus. In the interests of science, on several occasions, Montagnier sent samples of his tissue cultures to the Gallo laboratory in America with the express understanding these "could be used for biomedical, biological and molecular biological studies".(65) However, Montagnier did not claim to have proven his virus was the cause of AIDS and the French discovery lay on the table until May 1984 when Gallo and Popovic and their colleagues (66-69) published four papers also in Science. On the 23rd of April 1984, at a Washington press conference held two weeks before the papers were published, Margaret Heckler, Secretary for Health and Human Services, announced that Gallo and his co-workers had discovered the "probable" cause of AIDS and had developed a sensitive blood test to detect the virus in the body. A curative vaccine was predicted within two years. Inexplicably, causation was proclaimed merely by association and despite "isolation" of HIV in only 26 of Gallo’s 72 (36%) AIDS patients, or barely a third. (The frequency of "isolation" is no better today.(70)).

In 1985 the Pasteur Institute alleged that Gallo had misappropriated their virus. The ensuing conflict, which eventually reached the American courts, was settled by a negotiated agreement signed in 1987 by Gallo and Montagnier as "co-discoverers", and US President Reagan and French Premier Chirac. Nevertheless, the matter drew the attention of John Crewdson, an investigative journalist, and US Senator John Dingell. In November 1989, Crewdson published a lengthy article in the Chicago Tribune newspaper, which provoked an internal NIH enquiry into suspect data from Gallo's laboratory. A draft report of the formal investigation written by NIH Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI), was published in September 1991, in which the principal author Mikulas Popovic was accused "of misconduct for misstatements and inaccuracies" that appeared in the first Science paper, and that Gallo, as laboratory chief, "created and fostered conditions that give rise to falsified/ fabricated data and falsified reports". The final draft report of the OSI, completed in January 1992, was immediately criticised and was followed by a review of the OSI report by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), which found Gallo guilty of scientific misconduct. However, despite the long and costly investigation, the OSI concluded that Gallo's research "does not negate the central findings of the [1984] Science paper". According to Eleopulos and her colleagues, regardless of the material uncovered by the OSI, Gallo's data, which still remains the best of its kind, does not prove the existence of HIV and even if it did, nowhere in the papers is their proof that HIV causes AIDS.(16,21)
 
Peter Duesberg

In December 1987, three and a half years after the Washington press conference, Professor Peter Duesberg, virologist and molecular biologist at the University of Berkeley, California, published an invited paper entitled "Retroviruses as Pathogens: Expectations and Reality".(3) Duesberg was a much fêted scientist, considered to be "the golden boy of virology" and "the greatest living retrovirologist". He had developed many of the laboratory techniques for studying retroviruses and their genetic make up, had discovered cancer causing genes, and was recipient of a $US350,000 "outstanding investigator" award from the NIH. But Duesberg dropped a bombshell. He asserted that, apart from the relative few cancer causing retroviruses, the majority are virtually harmless. Duesberg argued that HIV is neutralised by antibodies shortly after infection and thus antibodies signal its containment. He also pointed to data proving that well, sick or dying from AIDS, HIV positive individuals contain insufficient amounts of HIV to do harm. Even if HIV were to kill all the T4 cells it had infected every 1-2 days, the amount of T4 cells needing replacing approximated the amount of blood shed by a man cutting himself shaving.

For the protagonists, the low "viral burden", that is, the amount of "HIV DNA" in cells, was a fact that no one, not even Gallo, could satisfactorily reconcile with an immune destroying pathogen killing gay men within a year or two of diagnosis. However, rather than addressing this as a scientific problem warranting dialogue with someone known to have considerable knowledge of the subject, Duesberg's questions antagonised Gallo to the point where he refused to discuss the matter. Meetings convened to deal with the uncomfortable implications of Duesberg's paper were suddenly cancelled at the highest level.

In 1989 Duesberg presented further argument.(4) HIV does not fulfil the postulates nineteenth century bacteriologist Robert Koch had developed to prove a microbe causes a disease. These four postulates are one, that the organism must be present in all cases of the disease; two, that it must be grown and then isolated in pure culture from the cells of individuals with the disease; three, that it must reproduce the disease when introduced into a susceptible host or experimental animals and four, that from whence it must once again be recovered.

According to Duesberg "From every angle, HIV fails Koch’s first postulate".(1) The second postulate was fulfilled but only by subjecting cells to drastic chemical manipulation that did not approach conditions in vivo. Eleopulos has argued how basic retrovirology has long shown that oxidation which prevails in HIV/AIDS patients and their cell cultures creates internal (endogenous) retroviruses in cells whose DNA was not previously infected from the outside (12,14,15,71,72) (One percent of human DNA, that is, an amount 3000 times larger than "HIV" DNA, is made up of endogenous retroviral DNA(73)). The third postulate failed because, "During the past decade, more than four hundred thousand AIDS patients have been treated and investigated by a system of five million medical workers and AIDS researchers, none of whom have been vaccinated against HIV… But ten years later there is not even one case in the scientific literature of a health worker who ever contracted presumably infectious AIDS from a patient… AIDS is not infectious". Similarly, "nine years after the NIH first started infecting chimpanzees with HIV-over 150 so far at a cost of $40,000-50,000 apiece", all "are still healthy".(5 **)

In 1992, Duesberg shifted focus from HIV to argue that "AIDS [is] acquired by drug consumption and other noncontagious risk factors".(5) Apart from illicit and recreational drugs, Duesberg’s list included the first "anti-retroviral" compound zidovudine (AZT). In other words, a specific treatment for HIV infection was a cause of AIDS. Duesberg continued to regard HIV bona fide but an inert, harmless "passenger" virus linked to AIDS only through the kinds of activity associated with drug taking (including prescribed drugs). Duesberg, like others before him, pointed to the epidemiological data revealing a 50 fold difference in the AIDS "attack rate" between various groups of HIV positive individuals, as well as the proclivity of certain AIDS diseases for particular risk groups. Thus 50% of HIV positive blood transfusion recipients develop AIDS within one year (but so do 50% of HIV negatives) compared to 1% of haemophiliacs. Kaposis’ sarcoma was to all intents and purposes, confined to gay men.(5,13,74)). Thus, even if HIV were necessary to cause AIDS, it could not be the only factor. However, accretion of "co-factors" to the HIV theory rendered the significance of any particular factor problematic. It was possible to argue that HIV may be only a minor factor or, at least in Eleopulos' and Duesberg's minds, not a factor. Apparently the role of HIV was also a problem for Montagnier. Although he wrote in Nature in December 1984, "all available data are consistent with the virus being the causative agent of AIDS",(75) in 1985 he expressed an opinion impossible to reconcile with the HIV theory. "This syndrome occurs in a minority of infected persons, who generally have in common a past of antigenic stimulation and of immune depression before LAV [HIV] infection",(76) that is, cause after effect (italics ours). One must surmise that within a year, the discoverer of HIV was already hedging his bets. His recent interview with the investigative journalist Djamel Tahi (61) (see below), fuels such speculation.
 
Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos and the Perth group

Eleopulos’ AIDS research began in 1981. In May 1986 she submitted for publication a paper which refuted every step in the HIV theory, including HIV itself. She also proposed an alternative, non-viral theory (of which "Duesberg’s" "Drugs/AIDS hypothesis" is a subset), and predicated non-toxic and relatively inexpensive treatments.
Her theory was based on a general theory of cellular functioning she had formulated in the 1970s as a basis for unraveling the genesis and improving the treatment of cancer, and to offer fresh insights into the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases and aging. Eleopulos postulates that normal cellular functioning is determined by the level and oscillations of cellular redox (23) (oxidation and its chemical opposite, reduction). In her view, when oxidation is prolonged or excessive, cells become abnormal, injured and susceptible to diseases. Eleopulos had noticed a link between the risk groups. Gay men, drug users and haemophiliacs are exposed to chemical stressors in the form of semen, nitrites, illicit drugs and factor VIII (the blood clotting protein missing from and administered to haemophiliacs). There is abundant evidence that these substances are potent cellular oxidants.(12) In Eleopulos’ view, oxidative stress produces low T4 cells and AIDS, as well as the phenomena inferred as proof for the existence of HIV.

The ready acceptance of the Montagnier/Gallo 1983/84 Science papers posed enormous difficulties for Eleopulos having her work published. Thus "Reappraisal of AIDS: Is the oxidation caused by the risk factors the primary cause?" was twice rejected by Nature eventually finding light of day in Medical Hypotheses twelve months after Duesberg.(12) However, the editor of this journal also rejected the paper, only recanting after Eleopulos worked for several months to convince him that equatorial Africa was not in the grip of an epidemic of sexually transmitted immunodeficiency and thus not in breach of her theory.(11,24,63,77)

To paraphrase the theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, wrong predictions affirm bad theories, correct predictions make them powerful. The HIV theory requires that HIV causes all the AIDS defining diseases and predicts that HIV/AIDS will become a global epidemic via the oldest and most unstoppable of all human activities. However, Kaposis’ sarcoma, one of the two diseases for which the HIV theory was proposed, is no longer attributed either directly or indirectly (via AID), to HIV.(12,13,54,74,78 §) In the OECD countries the prediction of a sexual pandemic fails completely. For example, as of the beginning of 1998, 93% of the cumulative deaths from AIDS in Australia occurred in the original risk groups, that is, gay/bisexual men, drug addicts and haemophiliacs. This observation fits the classic demographic profile of non-infectious diseases such as pellagra, beriberi and scurvy which also remain confined to their risk groups. All are caused by vitamin deficiencies but in the past were regarded infectious and sufferers shunned and quarantined. The HIV protagonists also predicted a curative vaccine by the end of 1986 and an animal model to prove the HIV theory beyond all doubt. Neither prediction has been fulfilled. A vaccine is not envisaged before the turn of the century and animals given "HIV" do not develop AIDS.

On the other hand, the Eleopulos oxidative stress theory predicts the current demographic data, an apparent loss of T4 cells, the risk of passive anal intercourse in both sexes, HIV positive and AIDS patients being oxidised relative to normal individuals, the ameriolation of HIV/AIDS by the use of antioxidants and a non-infectious animal model. Everyone of these predictions has materialised. Oxidative stress is well established by hundreds of papers,(14,62,79-81) so much so that in the early 1990s the Pasteur Institute was advertising international scholarships to study the phenomenon. In fact this year Luc Montagnier is the principal editor of a 558 page book devoted to oxidative stress in cancer, aging and AIDS.(82)

The Eleopulos theory predicts that a decline in T4 cells can occur without cellular death. In fact, according to the Perth group, there is no evidence to support the notion that T4 cells are dead, or that "HIV" kills such cells. In T4 cell cultures, the same number T4 cells "disappear" regardless of whether one adds "HIV" or merely the chemical stimulants obligatory to "grow" the "HIV".(83) Neither is there proof that low numbers of T4 cells are either necessary or sufficient to produce the clinical syndrome.(9,12,14) This is a view recently expressed by leading HIV/AIDS scientists such as Dr. Arthur Anderson from the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (84) and Dr. Zvi Grossman at the University of Tel Aviv.85

In other words, the central tenet of the HIV theory, virus induced killing of immune cells leading to AIDS, is now being questioned by HIV/AIDS experts themselves. Nonetheless, and despite so much evidence to the contrary, the orthodox view remains entrenched. In fact, since 1993 the low numbers of T4 cells has been enshrined in the 1993 CDC AIDS definition whereby AIDS can be diagnosed without a disease. Just as "co-factors" were proposed to rescue the HIV theory in the mid 1980s, in July 1998 Chen and colleagues from the UCLA AIDS Institute, School of Medicine, Los Angeles reported evidence that "naturally noninfectious virus" or virus or "rendered defective" by "anti-HIV" drugs, could still contribute to the loss of T4 cells throughout the course of HIV disease.(86) In other words, "alive" or "dead", HIV causes immune deficiency. Such a proposal does not auger well for the use or continued development of "anti-HIV" drugs.

Consistent also with the Eleopulos oxidatives stress theory is the direct relationship between high frequencies of passive anal intercourse and the development of AIDS, as well as the fact that the only animal model of AIDS is non-infectious. Mice repeatedly injected with foreign cellular proteins develop a dramatic depletion of T4 cells, Kaposi's sarcoma-like tumors and "abundant" retroviral-like particles appear in their spleens.(87) Thus AIDS diseases are followed by the production of retroviral-like particles and not the other way around.
 
The demise of scientific democracy

The longevity of the HIV theory has been considerably boosted by the virtual refusal of editors of leading medical journals to publish any material which takes HIV to task. Without these data, and the stamp of approval engendered by such publication, it is almost impossible for the debate to reach the ears of those who matter the most, clinicians and their patients. Like generals directing wars, the remoteness of editors begets an objectivity which, while essential to clear thinking, militates against an appreciation of the profound responsibilities editors hold at the bedside. Ultimately, although the HIV theory is manifoldly problematic, physicians, patients, relatives, politicians, journalists and the tax paying public are systematically denied knowledge of its existence and substance. Not only is there is a total absence anywhere of a disinterested, adjudicated debate, individuals whose only motivation is to contribute to solving a disease claimed to afflict millions of people, find themselves censored.

For example, the editor of the world’s most prestigious journal, Nature, denied Duesberg the right of reply on issues he raised because his views give "many infected people the belief that HIV infection is not in itself the calamity it is likely to prove".(29) Yet, in a recent edition of the same journal, but in another context, there is a claim that "the voice of sceptics may grow tiresome, but the mainstream is in trouble if it cannot win a public debate with them". Officials at the Berlin 10th International AIDS Conference confiscated Dutch AIDS analyst Robert Laarhoven's press pass and threatened him with expulsion from Germany for "criminal trespass" because he placed copies of the dissident journal Rethinking AIDS on an "unauthorised" table. Nature has repeatedly rejected every paper and letter submitted by Eleopulos and her colleagues since 1986 without providing any scientific reasons and invariably citing space constraints in the journal. Professor John Kaldor, one of Australia's foremost "established experts" on AIDS admits that dissidents "intersperse their cases with grains of fact".(88) However, because of Kaldor and colleagues’ "strong instinct not to dignify the sceptics' arguments by attempting to refute them", arguments based on these "grains of fact" and many other data, remain unanswered and unresolved.
 
The rise and fall of the "anti-HIV" drugs

It would take a second article to discuss AZT and the many other "anti-HIV" drugs. Suffice it to say there is no scientific proof that such drugs kill "HIV" or cure AIDS but there is ample evidence they are harmful.(1,53,56) In 1994, a double-blind randomised comparison of two policies of AZT treatment (immediate and deferred) was reported (the Concorde trial). This involved 1749 symptom-free, HIV-infected individuals from centres in the UK, Ireland and France. The 347 clinical endpoints (AIDS and death) outnumbered the total of those in all other published trials in symptom-free and early symptomatic infection. The results showed "there was no statistically significant difference in clinical outcome between the two therapeutic policies".(89) In 1995, extended results of Concorde showed a significant increased risk of death among the patients treated early. However, despite these data, disclaimers that patients treated with AZT may continue to develop the AIDS diseases, that the side effects of AZT may mimic AIDS, and AZT given to non-HIV-infected babies causes the AIDS defining pneumonia PCP,(90) AZT continues to be the most commonly prescribed anti-HIV drug. Dr. Donald Abrams, Professor of Medicine and Director of the AIDS program at San Francisco General Hospital, said "I have a large population of people who have chosen not to take any antiretrovirals... I've been following them since the very beginning...They've watched all of their friends go on the antiviral bandwagon and die".(91) Indeed, even an elementary study of the relevant pharmacologicaL literature reveals that AZT cannot be an anti-HIV drug.(92)

In 1996, the latest drugs, the "protease inhibitors" (PI) were introduced. These are prescribed as one of up to 200 possible "cocktails" with AZT or similar drugs. Detailed data on these drugs of the kind usually reserved for medical practitioners, appear regularly in glossy, multi-page advertisements in gay mens’ magazines. At the July 1996 XIth International AIDS conference Time Magazine Man of the Year David Ho predicted that "scientists would find new drugs to wipe HIV out of the body within three years possibly within just one".(93) At the July 1998 XIIth AIDS conference Ho stated it will take at least ten years of intense combination drug therapy to kill off all the HIV in an infected person's body but a sizable percentage of HIV patients will never get close. Many patients cannot tolerate the untoward effects of these "cocktails" and measurements show that the DNA "viral" burden does not decrease.(94-97) In the May 1998 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dr. William Paul, former Director of the National Institutes of Health's Office of AIDS Research writes, "no matter how long a person is treated with anti-HIV drugs, there will always be new viruses... you will have to be treated forever... No one is getting cured... This bodes extremely poorly for combination therapy as something curative".(85)

Given the toxicity of these drugs, it is unlikely anyone can tolerate taking them for more than a few years. If this outlook is gloomy for HIV/AIDS sufferers, it is even worse considering there is no substantial, alternative therapeutic strategy anywhere on the horizon. The futility of all "anti-HIV" drugs, past present and future is best highlighted in a June 1998 interview by Dr. Harold Varmus, Nobel Laureate retrovirologist and Director of the NIH. "Trying to rid the body of a virus whose genome is incorporated into the host genome may be impossible".(98) Indeed, how can a drug rid a body of material so intimately bound to the host DNA genetic material?
 
SOME SCIENTIFIC PROBLEMS WITH THE HIV THEORY
 
The theory versus the definition

The central premise of the HIV theory of AIDS is that there exists a unique retrovirus, transmissible via blood and sexual secretions, which induces specific antibodies, kills T4 cells whose relative absence then causes the appearance of approximately 30 diseases which constitute the clinical syndrome. The theory however is rendered completely contradictory by the official AIDS definition used clinically. In Australia an individual is diagnosed AIDS if he or she fulfills the criteria set out in the latest (1993) revision of the US "CDC surveillance case definition for AIDS".(99) (Other definitions in use around the world make scientific comparisons almost impossible. In Africa AIDS is diagnosed on symptoms and without blood tests (100)). Since from 1985 the CDC "accepts" HIV as the cause of AIDS, it should not be possible to diagnose AIDS by any means inconsistent with the HIV theory. However, even a cursory reading of the 1993 definition reveals AIDS can be diagnosed with the imprimatur of the CDC: with Kaposis’ sarcoma which even Gallo (54) accepts is not caused by HIV, in the absence of immune deficiency, "without laboratory evidence of HIV infection" and, extraordinarily, "in the presence of negative results for HIV infection"(101) (italics ours).
 
Sexual transmission

HIV/AIDS is claimed to be bidirectionally sexually transmitted. Data to support this claim is based not upon microbial isolation and contact tracing as is the orthodox practice for proving diseases are infectious and sexually transmitted (STD), but on mostly retrospective studies of highly selected groups of individuals including gay and bisexual men, heterosexual men and women including prostitutes, for antibodies in blood which react certain proteins deemed "HIV specific". Included in these studies are estimations of risk factors for the specific sexual practices of penile insertive, vaginal, anal receptive and oral receptive intercourse.
 
Gay men

In 1984 Gallo and his colleagues showed that "Of eight different sexual acts, a positive HIV antibody test correlated only with receptive anal intercourse" (102). They also found the more often a gay man has insertive anal intercourse the less likely he was to become HIV positive. This is incompatible with an infectious cause. In 1986 Gallo and his colleagues reported they "found no evidence that other forms of sexual activity, contribute to the risk" of HIV seroconversion in gay men.(103) In an extensive review of 25 studies of gay men reported in 1994 by Caceres and van Griensven, the authors concluded that " no or no consistent risk of the acquisition of HIV-1 infection has been reported regarding insertive intercourse".(104) In the West, the largest and most judiciously conducted prospective epidemiological studies such as the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) of 4955 gay men (105) have proven beyond all reasonable doubt that in gay men the only significant sexual act related to becoming HIV antibody positive is receptive anal intercourse. Thus in gay men, AIDS may be likened to the non-infectious condition, pregnancy. It is acquired by the passive partner but is not transmitted to the active partner.

Significantly, the MACS also showed that once a gay man becomes HIV positive, progression to AIDS is further determined by the amount of passive anal intercourse sustained after "infection". This is contrary to all that is known about infectious diseases. Infection, not repeated infections, causes disease. Indeed, although the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons considers HIV positive surgeons "to be infectious and should not perform invasive procedures or operations. However, "(t)hey may provide these services to patients who have the same infection".(106)
 
Heterosexuals

The largest and best conducted studies in heterosexuals including the European Study Group (107) show that for women, the only sexual practice leading to an increased risk of becoming HIV antibody positive is anal intercourse. The unidirectional transmission of "HIV" observed in OECD countries is supported by Nancy Padian's ten year study of heterosexual couples (1986-1996).(108) There were two parts to this study, one cross-sectional, the other prospective. In the former "The constant per-contact infectivity for male-to-female transmission was estimated to be 0.0009 [1/1111]". The risk factors for the women were: (i) anal intercourse;. (ii) having partners who acquired this infection through drug use (Padian says that this means the women may also be IV drug users); (iii) the presence of STDs. (antibodies to their causative agents may react in an "HIV" antibody test (15,20) Of the HIV negative male partners of 82 positive female cases only 2 became HIV positive but under circumstances considered ambiguous by Padian. In the prospective study, starting in 1990, 175 HIV-discordant couples were followed for approximately 282 couple-years. At entry, one third used condoms consistently and in the six months prior their last follow up visit, 26% of couples consistently failed to use condoms. There were no seroconversions after entry including the 47 couples not using condoms consistently. Based on the 2/86 men who became HIV positive in the early study, the risk to a non-infected male from his HIV positive female partner was reported to be in the order of 1/9000 per contact. From this statistic one can calculate that on average, a male would need to have 6000 sexual contacts with an infected female to achieve a 50% chance of becoming HIV positive. At three contacts per week this would take 56 years, or a life time.
 
Prostitutes

The notion that HIV is a virus which "does not discriminate" is also markedly inconsistent with the data obtained from studies of female prostitutes. Even if, as it is widely accepted, by some unknown means a sexually transmitted infectious agent found its way into the promiscuous portion of the gay male population in certain large cities in the United States in the late 1970s, given the facts that prostitutes are frequented by bisexual men and, at the very earliest, "safe" sexual practices date from 1985, one would have expected HIV/AIDS to have spread rapidly through prostitutes and thence to the general community. However, the prevalence of "HIV" antibodies amongst prostitutes is almost entirely confined to those who are drug users. Virtually all other prostitutes have not been, and are not becoming, HIV positive.

In September 1985, 56 non-intravenous drug using (IVDU) prostitutes were tested "In the rue Saint-Denis, the most notorious street in Paris for prostitution. More than a thousand prostitutes work in this area…These women, aged 18-60, have sexual intercourse 15-25 times daily and do not routinely use protection". None were positive.(109)
In Copenhagen, 101 non-IVDU prostitutes, a quarter of whom "suspected that up to one fifth of their clients were homosexual or bisexual", were tested during August/October 1985. The median numbers of sexual encounters per week was 20. None were positive.(110)

In 1985, 132 prostitutes (and 55 non-prostitutes) who attended a Sydney STD clinic were tested for HIV antibodies. The average numbers of sexual partners (clients and lovers) in the previous month was 24.5. When an estimate was made to separate clients and lovers, the median number of sexual contacts per year rose from 175 to 450. The partners of only 14 (11%) of prostitutes used condoms at all and 49% of their partners used condoms in fewer than 20% of encounters. No women were positive.(111)

The same Australian Clinic repeatedly tested an additional 491 prostitutes who attended between 1986 and 1988. Of 231 out of the 491 prostitutes surveyed, 19% "had bisexual non-paying partners and 21% had partners who injected drugs. Sixty-nine percent always used condoms for vaginal intercourse with paying clients, but they were rarely used with non-paying partners. Condoms were rarely used by those clients and/or partners for the 18% of prostitutes practising anal intercourse". No women were positive.
At the time of this report, a decade into the AIDS era, the authors also commented, "there has been no documented case of a female prostitute in Australia becoming infected with HIV through sexual intercourse" (italics ours). Yet, these investigators from the Sydney Sexual Health Centre concluded "there are still many women working as prostitutes in Sydney who remain seriously at risk of HIV infection".(112) In Spain, of 519 non-IVDU prostitutes tested between May 1989 and December 1990, only 12 (2.3 per cent) had positive test, which was "only slightly higher than that reported 5 years ago in similar surveys". Some prostitutes had as many as 600 partners a month and the development of a positive antibody test was directly related to the practice of anal intercourse. The authors also noted, "a more striking and disappointing finding was the low proportion of prostitutes who used condoms at all times, despite the several mass-media AIDS prevention campaigns that have been carried out in Spain".(113)

Similar data from two Scottish studies,(114) the 1993 "European working group on HIV infection in female prostitutes study",(115) and a 1994 report of 53,903 Filipino prostitutes tested between 1985 to 1992, confirm that non-IVDU prostitutes remain virtually devoid of HIV infection. For example, in the latter study, only 72 (0.01%) women were found to be HIV positive.

In studies where there appear to be a high incidence of HIV amongst prostitutes there are uncertainties that defy explanation. For example, although "HIV has been present in the commercial sex work networks in the Philippines and Indonesia for almost as long as it has been in Thailand and Cambodia", the prevalence of HIV in the former is 0.13% and 0.02% respectively and 18.8% and 40% in the latter.(116) If these are accurate data, the discrepancy defies epidemiological explanation and has indeed baffled the experts although the latter postulate "behavioural factors" such as one country’s prostitutes and clients being considerably more or less sexually active than another. However, one could also pose another question. What are the "HIV" antibody tests actually measuring? Be that as it may, since 5674 (44%) and 4360 (34%) of the 12785 Cambodian "HIV and AIDS Case Reports" till 31/12/97 are listed as "Unknown" gender and age respectively,(117) data collection, at least by the WHO in Cambodia, must be regarded as problematic.
 
Contradictions

Why should HIV avoid non-drug using prostitutes? If female prostitutes who do not use drugs do not become HIV infected despite being "seriously at risk of HIV infection", what is the risk of infection to the majority of Australian women who are neither drug users nor prostitutes? According to data from the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research, vanishingly little. A 1989 study testing 10, 217 blood samples of newborn babies (unambiguous evidence of heterosexual activity without condoms), found that no babies or mothers were HIV positive.(118) If such women remain non-infected, how do their non-drug using, male heterosexual partners become infected with HIV?

According to Simon Wain-Hobson, a leading HIV expert from the Pasteur Institute, "a virus's job" is to spread. "If you don't spread, you're dead". (Weiss, 1998 #1179) The "overwhelming" evidence from studies both in gay men and heterosexuals is that HIV/AIDS is not bidirectionally sexually transmitted. In the whole history of Medicine there has never been such a phenomenon. Since microbes rely on person to person spread for their survival, it is impossible to claim from epidemiological data that HIV/AIDS is an infectious, sexually transmitted disease. Indeed, Professor Stuart Brody, from the University of Tubingen, has argued that physicians ignore the actual heterosexual data and instead promote the politically correct idea that everyone is at risk. "Ideological knowledge about AIDS is far more likely to filter through society than scientific knowledge".(37)
 
THE DIAGNOSIS OF "HIV" INFECTION
 
The HIV antibody tests

There are two "HIV" antibody tests in common use, the ELISA and Western blot (WB). The ELISA causes a colour change when a mixture of "HIV" proteins reacts with antibodies in serum from a patient. In the Western blot, "HIV" proteins are first separated along the length of a nitrocellulose strip. This enables individual reactions to the ten or so "HIV" proteins to be visualised as a series of darkened "bands". The Western blot test is used to "confirm" repeatedly positive ELISAs because experts agree that the ELISA "overreacts", that is, it is insufficiently specific.(¥) Prior to 1987, one "HIV specific" WB band was considered proof of HIV infection. However, since 15%-25% of healthy, no risk individuals have "HIV specific" WB bands,(119,120) it became necessary to redefine a positive WB by adding extra and selecting particular bands, otherwise at least one in every seven people would be diagnosed infected with HIV. (Notwithstanding, in the MACS, one band remained proof of HIV infection in gay men until 1990 (121)).

On the other hand, although AIDS began to decline in 1987,(122,123) this trend was countered by the addition of more and more diseases and, most recently, mere laboratory abnormalities to each revision (1985, 1987 and 1993) of the first, 1982 CDC definition. The net effect of these changes was to maintain the correlation between "HIV" antibodies and "AIDS" amongst the "risk" groups while the risk of an HIV/AIDS diagnosis outside these groups remained slight. This was further accentuated by avoiding testing outside the risk groups. However, when such studies were performed, for example, (a) amongst 89,547 anonymously tested blood specimens from 26 US hospital patients at no risk of AIDS, between 0.7% to 21.7% of men and 0-7.8% of women aged 25-44 years were found to be HIV WB positive.(124) (It is estimated that approximately 1% of men are gay. Also, at the five hospitals with the highest rates of HIV antibodies, one third of positive tests were in women. Yet men vastly outnumber women as AIDS patients). (b) the US Consortium for Retrovirus Serology Standardization reported that 127/1306 (10%) of individuals at "low risk" for AIDS including "specimens from blood donor centers" had a positive HIV antibody test by the "most stringent" US WB criteria (119) (see below). Thus the correlation between "HIV" antibodies and AIDS, which experts accept as the only proof that HIV causes AIDS, could not be a statistic related to the natural, unbridled activity of a virus but is instead a contrivance of mankind. Not only does correlation never prove causation, the artificiality of this particular "correlation" disqualifies it from meaningful scientific analysis.
One of the most bizarre aspects of the HIV/AIDS theory is that different laboratories, institutions and countries define different sets of WB bands as a positive test (Figure 1). The global variation in interpretive criteria means for example, that in Australia a positive test requires particular sets of four bands. In the USA, different sets of two or three suffice, which may or may not include the bands required in Australia. In Africa only one designated set of two is required.

Put simply, this means that the same person tested in three cities on the same day may or may not be HIV infected. If the diagnosis of HIV infection were a game of poker, a flush would require five cards the same suit in one country but only one or two elswhere. A virus cannot behave in this manner, but, according to the HIV test, which is claimed to have a specificity of 99.999%,(125) it does.

As incomprehensible as this appears, further difficulties remain. For example, an Australian tested in Australia with one or two "HIV specific" bands would not be reported HIV infected.(101). Clearly however, there must be a reason why an uninfected individual, such as a healthy blood donor or military recruit can possess any, even one, "HIV specific" band. According to the experts, these bands are caused by cross-reacting, that is, "false", "non-HIV" antibodies which react with the "HIV" proteins. Thus it is axiomatic that an antibody which reacts with a particular protein is not necessarily an antibody the immune system has generated specifically in response to that protein. The Australian National HIV Reference Laboratory (NRL) concedes that "False reactivity may be to one or more protein bands and is common"(120) (20-25%). However Eleopulos argues, if "non-HIV" antibodies cause "one or more protein bands", then why are they not able to cause four or five? Or all ten? On what basis do experts assert which antibodies are "false" and which are "true"? Or, how the same three bands, caused by "false" non-"HIV" antibodies, become "true" when accompanied by one extra? On what basis do experts assert there are any "true" HIV antibodies? If the Australian traveller were to be tested in the USA, where two or three bands are sufficient to diagnose HIV infection, are his antibodies "false" in Australia but "true" as his aeroplane touches down in Los Angeles?

In 1994, Dr. Elizabeth Dax, the head of the NRL was asked to justify both the Australian criteria for a positive Western blot and the global variability.(28) Her response (126) avoided answering either question and subsequent correspondence failed to pass the editorial staff at the Medical Journal of Australia. When the same questions were later put via the Offices of Senator Chris Ellison, Minister for Schools, Vocational Education and Training, the first question was again unanswered and the widely different criteria between Australia and Africa were justified on the basis that in Africa, "comparatively, false reactivity is far less common [than in Australia] so that interpretation criteria to define [true] positivity may be less strict".(120)

However, no scientist can make such a claim without data. All antibody tests are subject to the vagaries of cross-reactions and the only way to calculate the incidences of "true" and "false" antibodies is to scrutinise reactions against what the test is purportedly meant to measure, that is, against HIV itself. HIV isolation is the only gold standard by which the specificity of the antibodies can be determined and this must be evaluated before the test is introduced into clinical practice. However, despite the WB being in widespread use and "a stalwart" (126) of HIV testing, these data have never been reported. This is an issue the NRL chronically and negligently fails to address. Even without such evidence since, (a) the NRL concedes that cross-reacting antibodies cause misleading reactions in the WB in one quarter of healthy Australians; (b) unlike Australians, Africans, (similar to the AIDS risk groups), are exposed to a multitude of infectious agents producing a myriad of antibodies each capable of cross-reactions; "false reactivity" will be much higher in Africa where the WB criteria should be the most stringent. Indeed, if it is true that "HIV" antibodies prove one third of heterosexual adults in certain central and east African countries are infected with HIV, "life in these countries must be one endless orgy".(39)

If the proteins used in the HIV ELISA and WB are unique constituents of an exogenous retrovirus, and if such a virus induces specific antibodies, we would never expect to find "HIV" antibodies in the absence of HIV. Yet, in addition to the circumstances above, there are numerous others where antibodies to the "HIV specific" proteins arise where HIV/AIDS experts concede there is no HIV. These include healthy mice injected with lymphocytes of similar mice (127) or bacterial extracts;(V. Colizzi et al., personal communication), following transfusions of HIV free blood (128) or a person's own irradiated blood,(129) and in 72/144 dogs tested at a Veterinary clinic in Davis USA.(130) In addition, antibodies to the microbes which cause the fungal and mycobacterial diseases affecting 90% of AIDS patients react with the "HIV specific" proteins.(20,131) This year it was reported that 35% of patients with primary biliary cirrhosis, 39% of patients with other biliary disorders, 29% of those with lupus, 60% of patients with hepatitis B, 35% of hepatitis C, all non-HIV, non-AIDS diseases, have antibodies to the "HIV" p24 "core" protein;(132)

Until 1990, an unknown number of the 4955 gay men in the MACS were diagnosed HIV infected on the basis of an antibody to the "HIV specific", p24 protein, that is, with one WB band. Why do not all similar tests prove infection with HIV? Why are gay men with a single, p24 band infected with a deadly virus while biliary and liver disease patients with the same band are not? Why were the criteria for diagnosing HIV infection set less rigorous in gay men? Although all HIV experts accept cross-reactivity in HIV antibody testing, in 1993 the New South Wales Department of Health interpreted the discovery of "HIV" antibodies in four woman as "compelling evidence" for transmission of HIV from a gay man during the course of minor, office surgery in 1989.(133) However, there was no proof that the gay man was HIV infected at the time of surgery, or that any of the four women were operated on after the man. This report remains the only one of its kind in the world and immediately led to the establishment of a special committee of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons which wrote to all College Fellows inviting submissions upon the matter. However, rather than seizing upon the rarity of the event and following advice urging a formal, scientific enquiry into whether "HIV" antibodies are caused by infection with a retrovirus,(134) the College accepted these data as proof of cross-infection but concluded "The mode of transmission is unknown".(106 §§)
 
What proof is there for the existence of HIV?

Scientific evidence for the existence of a retrovirus must be consistent with the definition of a retrovirus as a particular kind of replicating, microscopic particle. Thus researchers must demonstrate the correct size, shape and construction of particles; that these particles have been purified and analysed and contain RNA as well as an enzyme that makes DNA from RNA (reverse transcription); and that the particles are infectious, that is, when pure particles are introduced into fresh cell cultures, identical progeny appear. The latter necessitates a second round of purification and analysis. Indeed, although this method is entirely logical and was deemed essential at a meeting held at the Pasteur Institute in 1973,(135,136) it has been ignored by all HIV researchers.
Although there are electron microscope (EM) pictures from unpurified cell cultures of particles purported to be "HIV", it was not until March 1997 that EMs of "purified HIV" were published.(137,138)

Yet such data is the first, most essential step in attempts to prove particles are a virus, and for subsequent extraction of constituents for analysis and use as diagnostic reagents. These long awaited pictures reveal "purified HIV" to be a tangle of cellular debris. Scattered amongst this are scant particles which, without evidence, the authors claim are the HIV particles which "copurify" (sic) with the cellular material. Close examination of these particles as well as other evidence in the papers show they are too large, wrongly shaped, have too high a mass and are devoid of knobs HIV experts unanimously assert are absolutely essential for the "HIV" particle to cause infection. It is from this material, HIV/AIDS experts and biotechnology companies obtain proteins and RNA to use in tests to pronounce humans infected with a unique, exogenous AIDS causing microbe.

On July 17th 1997, the French investigative television journalist Djamel Tahi interviewed Professor Luc Montagnier in camera at the Pasteur Institute in Paris. Montagnier was asked, "Why do the EM photographs published by you [in 1983] come from the culture and not the purification?". His reply was, "There was so little production of virus it was impossible to see what might be in a concentrate of the virus from the gradient ["pure virus"]. There was not enough virus to do that. Of course one looked for it, one looked for it in the tissues at the start, likewise the biopsy. We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology typical of retroviruses. They were very different. Relatively different. So with the [unpurified] cultures it took many hours to find the first pictures. It was a Roman effort!… Charles Dauget [an EM expert] looked at the plasma, the concentrate, etc… he saw nothing major"(61) ( italics ours). Questioned about the Gallo group he replied, "Gallo? I don’t know if he really purified. I don’t believe so". This should have been both the beginning and the end of HIV.

Retroviral-like particles are virtually ubiquitous in biological material (139,140) including for example cell cultures and "in the majority if not all, human placentas".(141) (One should note that Montagnier’s "Roman effort" refers to EMs obtained from umilical cord blood lymphocytes). However, as Gallo confirms, because they do not replicate, the majority of retroviral-like particles are not retroviruses.(139,142) The "HIV" particle has been "classified" into two subfamilies and three genera of retroviruses. This is analogous to describing a new species of mammal as human, a gorilla and an orang-utan. Besides the "HIV" particle, cell cultures contain other particles of numerous morphologies whose origin and role are unknown.(18,143,144) A detailed study from Harvard (145) revealed the identical "HIV" particle in 18/20 (90%) of AIDS as well as in 13/15 (88%) of non-AIDS related lymph node enlargements.

HIV experts claim to detect and even "isolate" HIV merely by demonstrating "reverse transcription" in cultures. However, although present in retroviruses, reverse transcription is not, as many HIV/AIDS experts claim, unique to retroviruses or even viruses.(146,147) Well before the AIDS era Gallo himself showed that chemically stimulated (absolutely essential to "isolate HIV" from cultures) lymphocytes, possess this function.(148,149)
 
The "HIV" proteins and antibodies

Although both Montagnier and Gallo have never published EMs to prove the presence of retroviral-like particles in their "pure virus", and Montagnier now concedes there were none, both groups and all others since claim such material is "pure HIV". This claim is based on the fact that such material contains proteins which react with antibodies present in AIDS patients. However, this reasoning is untenable. Imagine a scientist who mixes two solutions together, obtains a precipitate and then proclaims the identity and source of several reactants. One does not need a degree in chemistry to realise this is an impossibility. Nonetheless, because cultures and antibodies derived from AIDS patients react together, the proteins are declared to belong to "HIV" and the antibodies the "HIV" specific antibodies. In fact, Gallo admits that for him, an antibody test is the quintessence of "HIV isolation". During an interview at the Geneva AIDS conference he said, "Sometimes we had Western blot positive but we couldn’t isolate the virus. So we got worried and felt we were getting false positives sometimes so we added the Western blot. That’s all I can tell you. It was an experimental tool when we added it and for us it worked well, ‘cos we could isolate the virus when we did it".(150) However, HIV isolation is not an antibody test and "HIV" proteins can only be defined by extracting them from particles purified and proven to be a retrovirus. Such material has never been shown to exist and such extraction never reported. Notwithstanding, since the mid 1980s, HIV researchers claim that the reaction between cell cultures and an antibody to merely one, the p24 protein, is "HIV isolation". Since "to isolate a virus" is to obtain infectious particles separate from everything else, it is particularly difficult to see how scientists can refer to a chemical reaction in this manner.
 
The origin of the "HIV" proteins

According to Eleopulos and her colleagues, all data presented to date is consistent with the "HIV" proteins being cellular. Using "HIV" antibodies as probes, "HIV" proteins have been identified in the tissues of persistently HIV negative, healthy individuals including blood platelet and skin cells, thymus, tonsil and brain.(15) As a mark of the bewildering status of the HIV theory, while HIV proteins could not be found in the placentas of 75 HIV positive pregnant women,(151) they could be found in the placentas of 25 healthy, HIV negative women.(152) That the HIV proteins are cellular is further strengthened by a recent, two-part experiment. Human lymphocytes, cultured in the absence of material from AIDS patients, is "purified" as it would be to obtain the "HIV" proteins. This "uninfected" material serves as a "mock virus" in experiments involving both "HIV" and "SIV" (simian [monkey] immunodeficiency virus, claimed similar to "HIV"). Analysis of "mock virus" reveals qualitatively a series of proteins bearing the same molecular weights as the proteins of "real" virus, strongly suggesting that the "HIV" proteins are cellular because the existence of HIV proteins demands they appear exclusively in cultures derived from AIDS patients.(137) In the second experiment, monkeys are immunised on several occasions with "mock virus", a procedure which subsequently protects them from a "challenge" with "real" SIV.(153,154) However, immunisation is specific. Immunisation with hepatitis vaccine does not protect against poliomyelitis. It relies on exposure of the animal to material specific to the organism against which protection is sought resulting in the production of specific antibodies by the immune system. Since proteins from the cells in which "SIV" is "grown" ("mock" virus), protects against "real" SIV, these must be exceedingly similar if not identical. That is, the "SIV", and by inference the "HIV" proteins, are all cellular.
 
The "HIV genome"

As is the case with the "HIV" proteins, the RNA purported to be the HIV genome has not been obtained from particles purified and proven infectious but from the conglomerate material described above. Molecular biologists have produced possibly more information about the "HIV" genome than any other object in the universe. Nonetheless, there are no reports of even one individual possessing a complete, full-length "HIV" genome and there is no agreement as to how many genes HIV possesses. Opinions have varied from four through to eight, nine or ten. Man and chimpanzee DNA differ by less than 2% but variation in the composition of the "HIV genome" (derived from analysis of "pieces" measuring 2% to 30% of the presumed total) measures between 3-40%. By comparison, two RNA containing viruses (polio and influenza, the latter after 27 years of dormancy,) vary by less than 1% as do RNA molecules self-assembled in test tubes denied the organising influence of living cells.(155,156)

Given that the DNA sequence determines the composition of a virus’s proteins, and the latter the physical, biochemical and biological properties of a virus, how is it possible for such variation to represent one and the same agent? For example, how is it possible that HIV can induce the same antibodies and which can be recognised in a universal antibody test containing the identical proteins? Since, as the molecular biologist Duesberg reminds us, "there is a range, a small range, in which you can mutate around without too much penalty, but as soon as you exceed it you are gone, and you are not HIV any longer, or a human any longer...then you are either dead or you are a monkey, or what have you",( it is evident that whatever the "HIV DNA genome" represents, it cannot be a virus.
 
Lessons from the past?

The evidence for the existence of Gallo’s "first human" retrovirus (HL23V) was much stronger than that for HIV.(20,25,157) However, in 1980 the antibodies to the HL23V proteins were shown to occur following a large variety of common non-infectious factors and in far more humans than could have ever developed leukaemia.(158,159) Thus, from signifying that an "infectious mode of transmission [of leukaemia] remains a real possibility in humans" and "infection with an oncovirus [retrovirus] may be extremely widespread",(160) the "first" human retrovirus abruptly disappeared from the annals of science. At present no one, not even Gallo, believes it existed. In the AIDS era experts recognise that antibodies to the "HIV specific" proteins occur where there is no HIV and in many more individuals than will ever develop AIDS. On what basis then does HIV still exist?
 
(continued next post)

[Satyagraha]

(continued from previous post)

THE DISSIDENT CASE, POLITICS AND PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY

The failures of the past fifteen years are fairly and squarely affixed to the five Montagnier and Gallo 1983/84 Science papers. That the titles of three of these papers contain the word "isolation" and yet no such evidence was presented, must stand as a memorial to the demise of editorial integrity. The dissident cases, that HIV does not exist (Eleopulos), or if it does exist does not cause AIDS (Eleopulos and Duesberg), ultimately implies there will be devastating outcomes in terms of scientific credibility including the failure of peer review, the reputations of many experts and non-experts, a challenge to the trust the citizen places in the hands of government, scientific and medical leaders as well as an uncertain period of ignominy for the medical profession as a whole. Weaving a just resolution through this maze of socio-medico-legal bedlam will require the utmost perspicacity and tenacity from political leaders.

Perhaps there are already signs of quiet beginnings with the 1994 return of the discovery of HIV to the French by the Americans followed by the most recent admissions of Montagnier in his 1997 interview. Perhaps it is also written in the faces of the Nobel Committee and the stubborn absence of a Nobel prize awarded for any of the 100,000 scientific papers representing HIV/AIDS research.
 
Exceptionalism

Over and above all the uncertainties surrounding the HIV/AIDS debate, AIDS science and medicine must stand as the most remarkable case of "exceptionalism" in history. The funding it attracts far outstrips that justified by its prevalence and economic impact.(161) For example, over the past 17 years Australia has a cumulative total of 7,766 cases of AIDS including 5575 deaths.(162 ¥§) The big spenders are (in order) the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. Their combined annual HIV/AIDS research budget amounts to US$1.8 billion for a cumulative total of 761,572 AIDS patients (many of whom are dead). Of an additional $US20 million spent by the European Union in 1994-98, most "money goes to support travel and meeting costs rather than laboratory research".(163) While thousands of dollars per patient are spent on HIV/AIDS research, only a few dollars are spent on heart disease, cancer, mental illness, suicide prevention or road trauma. The funding paradox reaches epidemic, almost farcical proportions in developing countries where Western AIDS workers spend their days dispensing advice and condoms to a population dying for want of potable water, adequate sanitation and nutrition, antibacterial, antitubercular and antimalarial medicines. In a word, dying of poverty.

Currently, the annual cost of anti-HIV drugs for one person costs about $US15,000 (which is greater than the entire health budget for many a third world village). With 650,000 to 900,000 HIV positive patients in the US as of July 1996, it would take $10 billion to pay for drugs alone. This must be viewed against the World Health Organisation's estimate that by the year 2000 there will be 30-40 million HIV infected people. Without HIV, AIDS patients, specialist AIDS units and their employees can rationally be absorbed into existing infrastructure of clinics and hospitals. The pursuit of expensive drugs designed to kill HIV will be irrelevant as will be the travail of the legions of HIV researchers. The same applies to AIDS councils, the armies of AIDS educators, AIDS fund raisers, volunteers and AIDS organisations. In the US alone there are 93,000 of the latter, one for every four persons ever diagnosed with AIDS.(34)
 
Clear thinking

Homo sapiens (thinking man), was not named in vain. An honourable society provides unfettered information and encourages its members to make rational choices. Epidemiology shows that the development of a positive "HIV" antibody test and AIDS is not so much related to a given sexual practice but rather to the frequency of passive anal intercourse in both men and women. It follows that AIDS is not a disease of sexual orientation. As far as women are concerned, it is prudent to note that in absolute terms, innumerably more women than men engage in anal intercourse. Thus AIDS is not unlike the case of the recently appended AIDS defining disease cervical cancer which, long before the AIDS era, was known to be related to the frequency of vaginal intercourse. Even so, it is not the act itself but the very high frequencies of the act which is pathogenic.

As serious as public reaction to an ill conceived retrovirus may prove, it will not be anywhere as serious as the legal backlash. There are countless individuals alive who believe they are infected with a deadly microbe, many of whom are currently treated with potentially toxic drugs with no proven benefit. They avoid intimacy, avoid having children and sometimes even casual contact with others. It would take a flotilla of poet laureates to voice the collective pain and suffering engendered by such a mistake. It would take an army of mathematically gifted lawyers to quantify, and the nation's coffers to compensate, those who lives have been ruined by what Neville Hodgkinson has called "the greatest scientific blunder of the 20th century".(29) This is not to mention patients and relatives who have died at their own hands. In 1987 former US Senator Lawton Chiles of Florida told an AIDS conference of a tragic case where twenty two blood donors were informed they were HIV infected on the basis of an ELISA test. Seven then committed suicide.(164)

In June this year the Swiss AIDS analyst Michael Baumgartner persuaded United Nations officials to include a dissident session at the XIIth International AIDS Conference held in Geneva. Speakers included Huw Christie, the editor of Continuum magazine, AIDS analyst and documentary film maker Joan Shenton, epidemiologist Professor Gordon Stewart, retrovirologist and electron microscopist Professor Etienne de Harven, virologist Dr. Stefan Lanka and, by satellite from Perth, Eleni Eleopulos and her group from the Royal Perth Hospital. In the audience were observers from the Pasteur Institute and the US National Institutes for Health. The topic of the session was a scientific critique of the HIV antibody tests and the evidence for the existence of HIV. At the official press conference held after the meeting, Professor Bernhard Hirschel, chairman of the Organising Committee, accused the speakers of "using outdated and untrustworthy scientific data". However, the "outdated" data is that of Montagnier and Gallo which led to the 1984 proclamation that HIV is the cause of AIDS. That considered "untrustworthy" is the HIV experts’ own data.

Notwithstanding these and many other challenges to the current dogma, HIV/AIDS experts are not in the least disquieted by sceptical patients, relatives or scientists and inveigh heavily against inquisitive journalists alleging great harm to public health. Thus it appears the only hope for an immediate resolution of this troubled issue is lawyers appearing for plaintiffs desiring judgements that they are or are not infected with an AIDS causing virus. However, even if an examination of "HIV science" is destined to be scrutinised by courts of law, at present one must be realistic that in the short term the status quo is extremely unlikely to change.
 
A real debate?

Nonetheless, it is inexorably drawing nearer to the time when world governments will convene an international, adjudicated debate on this subject. In contrast to the 13,775 participants from 177 countries who attended the June Geneva AIDS Conference, this should be a small gathering where a dozen or so experts from each side put their respective cases to a disinterested group of scientists of the utmost stature, for example, another dozen made up largely of Nobel laureates. There is a precedent for such a ‘consensus conference’ or ‘conference de citoyens’ in common sense and "along the lines of a model invented in Scandinavia and since applied in the United Kingdom and elsewhere". A "jury" of 14 people "screened for independence from interested parties" have issues "debated in front of them by scientists, non-governmental organizations, industrialists and other bodies…The power of public research bodies is probably the best guarantee of independence with respect to private sector research and the influence of multinationals".(165) By AIDS standards, funding for such a meeting would be trivial. Indeed, such would be its significance it would make money for the organisers.

Perhaps a disinterested observer could be forgiven for concluding that, although we are approaching the eighteenth year of the AIDS era, and have spent many billions of dollars on treatments and research, the words of Duesberg continue to taunt us: "By any measure, the war on AIDS has been a colossal failure...our leading scientists and policymakers cannot demonstrate that their efforts have saved a single life".(1) Perhaps those of Eleopulos group are of even greater portent: "The single most important obstacle in finding the explanation for AIDS is the belief in HIV.(19,26) In his recent book, "Dancing Naked in the Mind Field", Dr. Kary Mullis writes, "Years from now, people will find our acceptance of the HIV theory of AIDS as silly as we find those who excommunicated Galileo".(2) Indeed, it was Galileo who counseled, "In Science the authority embodied in the opinion of thousands is not worth a spark of reason on one man". Perhaps, seventeen years in, we should all pause, look around, and then take a long look back.
 
Dr. Valendar F. Turner, Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, West Australia. Andrew McIntyre, Freelance Journalist, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Voice 08 92242662
Fax 08 92247045
Email vturner@westnet.com.au
Website http://www.theperthgroup.com
 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors gratfully acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Peter Bloch of General Media International and Penthouse Magazine New York City for making available excerpts of Dr. Mullis’ forthcoming book.
 
ENDNOTES

*US journalist Christine Johnson's interview (now available in six languages) with the leader of the Perth group, was reviewed by scholar and international gay media personality Professor Camille Paglia, in her column in the US Salon magazine October 28th 1997: "For a superb critique of the scandalously overpoliticized scientific research on AIDS, see Christine Johnson's long interview with Australian biophysicist Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos in the new issue of the British AIDS magazine Continuum. The American major media have effectively suppressed long-standing questions about whether the AIDS test is reliable or whether an HIV virus in fact exists at all".

**On May 5th 1998, two US Republicans said they were exploring ways to give a comfortable retirement to 1,500 chimpanzees that were bred for AIDS research. Accompanied by primate expert Jane Goodall, House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Rep. Jim Greenwood, R-Penn. said they were working on a bill to set up sanctuaries for the chimps. The chimps, bred in the United States specifically for AIDS research, did not turn out to be the effective models that scientists had anticipated. With no research use, the primates that are man's closest cousins are languishing in cages at an annual cost of $US7.3 million.

§ In 1988, Eleopulos' paper that HIV does not cause Kaposis' sarcoma was thrice rejected by the Medical Journal of Australia on the advice of an "established expert". The reviewer stated, "The author tries to argue that Kaposis' sarcoma cannot be caused by HIV infection, and that therefore AIDS is not due to HIV infection. The arguments put forward by the author are quite unsatisfactory, and are not supported by even a desultory reading of the literature quoted. In addition, the author fails to examine the body of epidemiological, immunological and cellular literature concerning the pathology, pathogenesis and clinical associations of this fascinating manifestation of HIV infection". Yet this is the very "epidemiological, immunological and cellular literature" which eventually led the "established experts" to accept that "this fascinating manifestation of HIV infection", is not caused by HIV infection.

¥ Asked to comment at the Geneva conference on the fact that England and Wales have dropped the use of the WB to "confirm" positive HIV ELISAs, Gallo commented, "Well, the bulk of the world uses it. If some technology comes across better I’d be the first to say do it. I mean obviously. The Western blot’s a valuable test as defining the proteins that you have antibodies to. Everybody uses it experimentally and most people use it around the world. Not in Eng…,Britain doesn’t use it, maybe there are two countries that have found a better way. God bless them. OK?"

§§ In 1997 the Perth group attempted a second time to engage the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons in debating the HIV/AIDS controversy by submitting a paper entitled "A critical analysis of the evidence for the isolation of HIV" (www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/epappraisal.htm). It is editorial policy to "welcome personal views of surgeons on a variety of topics", and to publish papers on "current and controversial issues". Although both reviewers accepted the bulk of the scientific arguments and found the paper "interesting reading", they advised against publication because, in their view, an analysis of evidence for the isolation of HIV was of "no real relevance…to a surgical audience" or "would be of little interest or use to the majority of readers of the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery".

¥§ Of the 7766 Australian AIDS cases, 387 (5%) are reported in the "heterosexual contact" exposure category. However, 22 of these qualify on the basis of "Sex with injecting drug user", 35 "Sex with bisexual male", 56 "From high prevalence country" (where heterosexual spread is deemed dominant), 47 "Sex with HIV-infected person, exposure not specified", 170 "Not further specified". Thus injecting drug use, anal intercourse in women, the presumption of any form of sexual intercourse and lack of sufficient data question the mode of acquiring HIV infection in at least 330 (85%) of individuals listed in this exposure category.
 
REFERENCES:

1. Duesberg PD. (1996). Inventing the AIDS Virus. Washington, USA: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1996.
2. Mullis KB. (1998). Dancing Naked in the Mind Field: Pantheon, 1998.
3. Duesberg PH. (1987). Retroviruses as carcinogens and pathogens: Expectations and reality. Cancer Res. 47:1199-1220.
4. Duesberg PH. (1989). Human immunodeficiency virus and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome: correlation but not causation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 86:755-764.
5. Duesberg PH. (1992). AIDS acquired by drug consumption and other noncontagious risk factors. Pharmacol. Ther. 55:201-277.
6. Duesberg PH. (1995). Foreign-protein-mediated immunodeficiency in hemophiliacs with and without HIV infection. Genetica 95:51-70.
7. Duesberg P, Rasnick D. (1997). The drugs-AIDS hypothesis. Continuum 4:1s-24s.
8. Duesberg PH. (1996). Peter Duesberg responds. Continuum 4:8-9.
9. Papadopulos-Eleopopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Hedland-Thomas B, Causer D, Page B. (1995). A critical analysis of the HIV-T4-cell-AIDS hypothesis. Genetica 95:5-24.
10. Papadopulos-Eleopopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D. (1995). Fator VIII, HIV and AIDS in haemophiliacs: an analysis of their relationship. Genetica 95:25-50.
11. Papadopulos-Eleopopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Bialy H. (1995). AIDS in Africa: Distinguishing fact and fiction. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 11:135-143.
12. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E. (1988). Reappraisal of AIDS: Is the oxidation caused by the risk factors the primary cause? Med. Hypotheses 25:151-162.
13. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM. (1992). Kaposi's sarcoma and HIV. Med. Hypotheses 39:22-9.
14. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM. (1992). Oxidative stress, HIV and AIDS. Res. Immunol. 143:145-8.
15. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM. (1993). Is a positive Western blot proof of HIV infection? Bio/Technology 11:696-707.
16. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM. (1993). Has Gallo proven the role of HIV in AIDS? Emerg. Med. [Australia] 5:113-123.
17. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Causer DS, Papadimitriou JM. (1996). HIV transmission by donor semen. Lancet 347:190-1.
18. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM. (1996). Virus Challenge. Continuum 4:24-27.
19. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D. (1996). The Isolation of HIV: Has it really been achieved? Continuum 4:1s-24s.
20. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D. (1997). HIV antibodies: Further questions and a plea for clarification. Curr. Med. Res. Opinion 13:627-634.
21. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D. (1997). A critical analysis of the evidence for the isolation of HIV. At website www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/epappraisal.htm .
22. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D. (1995). A reply to Wei and Ho. At website www.virusmyth.com/aids/perthgroup/ .
23. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E. (1982). A Mitotic Theory. J. Theor. Biol. 96:741-758.
24. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF. (1994). Deconstructing AIDS in Africa. The Independent Monthly 50-51.
25. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D, Page B. (1998). HIV Antibody Tests and Viral Load - More Unanswered Questions and a Further Plea for Clarification. Curr. Med. Res. Opinion 14:185-186.
26. Papadopulos-Eleopopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D. (1997). Why no whole virus? Continuum 4:27-30.
27. de Harven E. (1997). Pioneer deplores "HIV". Continuum 5:24.
28. Turner VF. (1994). The HIV Western blot. Med. J. Aust. 160:807-808.
29. Hodgkinson N. (1996). AIDS The failure of contemporary science. London: Fourth Estate, 1996.
30. Callen M. (1991). Surviving AIDS. Harper Collins: Harper Collins Publishers, 1991.
31. Johnson C. (1997). Is HIV the cause of AIDS? Continuum 5:8-19.
32. De Marchi L, Franchi F. (1996). AIDS la grande truffa. ROME: Edizioni SEAM, 1996.
33. Shenton J. (1998). Positively false. London: I. B. Tauris, 1998.
34. Maggiore C. (1997). What if everything you thought you knew about AIDS was wrong? Los Angeles: HEAL, 1997.
35. McDonald JF, ed. Genetica. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.
36. Anonymous. (1995). Missing Virus: The Jody Wells Memorial Prize. Continuum 3:4.
37. Brody S. (1997). Sex at Risk: Lifetime Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse, and the Low AIDS Risk of Vaginal Intercourse. New Brunswick NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1997.
38. Caton H. (1994). The AIDS Mirage. Sydney: The University of New South Wales Press Ltd., 1994.
39. Chirimuuta RC, Chirimuuta RJ. (1987). Aids, Africa and Racism. 1st ed. Bretby House Stanhope Bretby, Burton-on-Trent, United Kingdom: R. Chirimuuta, 1987.
40. Christie H. (1995). HIV Positive? It depends where you live. Continuum 3:21.
41. Christie H. (1996). Counterculture. Continuum 4:18-21.
42. Christie H. (1997). From Hype to Hesitation. Continuum 4:11-12.
43. Christie H. (1998). Wake the law. Continuum 5:28-29.
44. Christie H. (1998). Do antibody tests prove HIV infection? Continuum 5:10-19.
45. Cohen J. (1994). The Duesberg Phenomenon. Science 266:1642-1649.
46. Current S. (1995). HIV and AIDS: Causation or coercion? Provincetown Positive 19-22.
47. Gildemeister V. (1996). Is Maddox mad or is he just pretending? Continuum 4:6-7.
48. Hodgkinson N. Research disputes epidemic of Aids. Sunday Times 1994 22nd May;24.
49. Hodgkinson N. World AIDS Conference. The European 1998 ;30.
50. Konotey-Ahulu. (1987). AIDS in Africa: Misinformation and Disinformation. Lancet ii:206-207.
51. Koliadin VL. (1995). Critical analysis of the current views on the nature of AIDS. Genetica 95:71-90.
52. Koliadin VL. Some facts behind the expansion of the definition of AIDS in 1993: Personal Communication, 1997.
53. Lauritsen J. (1993). The AIDS War. New York City: Asklepois Press, 1993.
54. Lauritsen J. (1994). Gallo admits...we have never found HIV DNA in Kaposi's sarcoma. Continuum 2:4.
55. Lauritsen J. (1994). NIDA Meeting Calls for Research into the Poppers-Kaposi's Sarcoma Connection. The New York Native At website www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/jlpoppers.htm.
56. Lauritsen J. (1990). Poison by prescription--The AZT story. New York: Asklepois Press, 1990.
57. Padian N, Pickering J. (1986). Female-to-male transmission of AIDS: a reexamination of the African sex ratio of cases. JAMA 256:590.
58. Root-Bernstein RS. (1993). Rethinking AIDS-The tragic cost of premature consensus. New York: Macmillan, Inc., 1993.
59. Root-Bernstein RS. (1995). Five myths about AIDS that have miscredited research and treatment. Genetica 95:111-132.
60. Mullis KB. (1995). A hypothetical disease of the immune system that may bear some relation to the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Genetica 95:195-197.
61. Tahi D. (1998). Did Luc Montagnier discover HIV? Text of video interview with Professor Luc Montagnier at the Pasteur Institute July 18th 1997. Continuum 5:30-34.
62. Turner VF. (1990). Reducing agents and AIDS--Why are we waiting? Med. J. Aust. 153:502.
63. Turner VF. (1998). Where we have gone wrong? Continuum 5:38-44.
64. Barré-Sinoussi F, Chermann JC, Rey F, et al. (1983). Isolation of a T-lymphotropic retrovirus from a patient at risk for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Science 220:868-71.
65. Gallo RC, Sarin PS, Kramarsky B, Salahuddin Z, Markham P, Popovic M. (1986). First isolation of HTLV-III. Nature 321:119.
66. Gallo RC, Sarin PS, Gelmann EP. (1983). Isolation of Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus in Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). Science 220:865-867.
67. Popovic M, Sarngadharan MG, Read E, Gallo RC. (1984). Detection, Isolation,and Continuous Production of Cytopathic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) from Patients with AIDS and Pre-AIDS. Science 224:497-500.
68. Sarngadharan M, G., Popovic M, Bruch L. (1984). Antibodies Reactive to Human T-Lymphotrophic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) in the Serum of Patients with AIDS. Science 224:506-508.
69. Schupbach J, Popovic M, Gilden RV, Gonda MA, Sarngadharan MG, Gallo RC. (1984). Serological analysis of a Subgroup of Human T-Lymphotrophic Retroviruses (HTLV-III) Associated with AIDS. Science 224:503-505.
70. WHO. (1994). HIV type 1 variation in World Health Organization-sponsored vaccine evaluation sites: genetic screening, sequence analysis, and preliminary biological characterization of selected viral strains. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 10:1327-1343.
71. Temin HM. (1974). On the origin of RNA tumor viruses. Harvey Lect. 69:173-197.
72. Weiss RA, Friis RR, Katz E, Vogt PK. (1971). Induction of avian tumor viruses in normal cells by physical and chemical carcinogens. Virol. 46:920-938.
73. Lower R, Lower J, Kurth R. (1996). The viruses in all of us: Characteristics and biological significance of human endogenous retrovirus sequences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 93:5177-5184.
74. Beral VD, Bull R, Darby S. (1990). Kaposis sarcoma and sexual practices associated with faecal contact in homosexual or bisexual men with AIDS. Lancet 339:632-636.
75. Alizon M, Sonigo P, Barre-Sinoussi P, et al. (1984). Molecular cloning of lymphadenopathy-associated virus. Nature 312:757-760.
76. Montagnier L. (1985). Lymphadenopathy-Associated Virus: From Molecular Biology to Pathogenicity. Ann. Int. Med. 103:689-693.
77. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF. (1995). Reconstructing AIDS in Africa-Reply to Kaldor and Ashton. The Independent Monthly Feburary:23-24.
78. Beral V, Peterman TA, Berkelman RL, Jaffe HW. (1990). Kaposi's sarcoma among persons with AIDS:a sexually transmitted infection? Lancet 335:123-128.
79. Buhl R, Jaffe HA, Holroyd KJ, et al. (1989). Systemic glutathione deficiency in symptom-free HIV-seropositive individuals. Lancet 2:1294-8.
80. Eck HP, Gmunder H, Hartmann M, Petzoldt D, Daniel V, Droge W. (1989). Low concentrations of acid-soluble thiol (cysteine) in the blood plasma of HIV-1-infected patients. Biol. Chem. Hoppe-Seyler 370:101-8.
81. Herzenberg LA, De Rosa SC, Dubs JG, et al. (1997). Glutathione deficiency is associated with impaired survival in HIV disease. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 94:1967-72.
82. Montagnier L, Olivier R, Pasquier C, eds. Oxidative stress in cancer, AIDS and neurogenerative diseases. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc, 1998.
83. Zagury D, Bernard J, Leonard R, et al. (1986). Long-Term Cultures of HTLV-III-Infected T Cells: A Model of Cytopathology of T-Cell Depletion in AIDS. Science 231:850-853.
84. Rosenberg YJ, Anderson AO, Pabst R. (1998). HIV-induced decline in blood CD4/CD8 ratios: viral killing or altered lymphocyte trafficking? Immunol. Today 19:10-7.
85. Grossman Z, Feinberg MB, Paul WE. (1998). Multiple modes of cellular activation and virus transmission in HIV infection: A role for chronically and latently infected cells in sustaining viral replication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 95:6314-6319.
86. Poon B, Grovit-Ferbas K, Stewart SA, Chen ISY. (1998). Cell cycle arrest by vpr in HIV-1 virions and insensitivity to antiretroviral agents. Science 281:266-269.
87. Ter-Grigorov VS, Krifuks O, Liubashevsky E, Nyska A, Trainin Z, Toder V. (1997). A new transmissible AIDS-like disease in mice induced by alloimmune stimuli. Nat. Med. 3:37-41.
88. Kaldor J, Ashton L. (1995). The AIDS debate: Reconstructing AIDS in Africa. The Independent Monthly 23-24.
89. Anonymous. (1994). Concorde: MRC/ANRS randomised double-blind controlled trial of immediate and deferred zidovudine in symptom-free HIV infection. Concorde Coordinating Committee. Lancet 343:871-81.
90. Heresi GP, Caceres E, Atkins JT, Reuben J, Doyle M. (1997). Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in infants who were exposed to human immunodeficiency virus but were not infected: an exception to the AIDS surveillance case definition. Clin. Infect. Dis. 25:739-40.
91. Abrams D. Lecture to Medical Students. Synapse, 1996.
92. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner VF, Papadimitriou JM, Causer D, Miller T, Alphonso H. (1999). A critical analysis of the pharmacology of AZT and its use in AIDS. Curr. Med. Res. Opinion in press.
93. Kilzer L. Optimistic AIDS reports beguiling at risk men. The Rocky Mountain News 1998 May 3rd;3A.
94. O. Brien W, Grovit-Ferbas K, Namazi A, et al. (1995). Human immunodeficiency virus-type 1 replication can be increased in peripheral blood of seropositive patients after influenza vaccination. Blood 86:1082-9.
95. Lee TH, Sheppard HW, Reis M, Dondero D, Osmond D, Busch MP. (1994). Circulating HIV-1-infected cell burden from seroconversion to AIDS: importance of posseroconversion viral load on disease course. J. Acquir. Immun. Defic. Syndr. 7:381-388.
96. Holodniy M, Mole L, Winters M, Merigan TC. (1994). Diurnal and short-term stability of HIV virus load as measured by gene amplification. J. Acquir. Immun. Defic. Syndr. 7:363-8.
97. Bruisten SM, Reiss P, Loeliger AE, et al. (1998). Cellular proviral HIV type 1 DNA load persists after long-term RT-inhibitor therapy in HIV type 1 infected persons. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 14:1053-1058.
98. Garrett L. AIDS, After The `Cure' / Amid setbacks, search for new hope. Newsday, Sunday 1998 June 14th;A07.
99. CDC. (1992). 1993 Revised Classification System for HIV Infection and Expanded Surveillance Case Definition for AIDS Among Adolescents and Adults. MMWR 41:1-19.
100. WHO. (1986). Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) WHO/CDC case definition for AIDS. Wkly. Epidem. Rec. 61:69-76.
101. Fauci AS, Lane HC. Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Disease: AIDS and Related Disorders. (1994). p. 1566-1618 In: Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine Isselbacher KJ, Braunwald E, Wilson JD, Martin JB, Fauci AS, Kasper DL, eds 13th ed McGraw-Hill Inc., New York.
102. Goedert JJ, Sarngadharan MG, Biggar RJ, et al. (1984). Determinants of retrovirus (HTLV-III) antibody and immunodeficiency conditions in homosexual men. Lancet 2:711-6.
103. Stevens CE, Taylor PE, Zang EA, et al. (1986). Human T-cell lymphotropic virus type III infection in a cohort of homosexual men in New York City. JAMA 255:2167-2172.
104. Caceres CF, van Griensven GJP. (1994). Male homosexual transmission of HIV-1. AIDS 8:1051-1061.
105. Kingsley LA, Kaslow R, Rinaldo CR, et al. (1987). Risk factors for seroconversion to human immunodeficiency virus among male homosexuals. Lancet i:345-348.
106. West RH, O'Connor TW, Penny R, et al. (1998). Policy Document Infection Control in Surgery. Melbourne: Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, 1998.
107. European Study Group. (1989). Risk factors for male to female transmission of HIV. Brit. Med. J. 298:411-414.
108. Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Glass SO, Vittinghoff E. (1997). Heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in northern California: results from a ten-year study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 146:350-357.
109. Anonymous. (1985). HTLV-III antibody in prostitutes. Lancet ii:1424.
110. Krogsgaard K, Gluud C, Pederson C, et al. (1986). Widespread use of condoms and low prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases in Danish non-drug addict prostitutes. Brit. Med. J. 293:1473-1474.
111. Philpot CR, Harcourt C, Edwards J, Grealis A. (1988). Human immunodeficiency virus and female prostitutes, Sydney 1985. Genitourinary Med. 64:193-7.
112. Philpot CR, Harcourt CL, Edwards JM. (1991). A survey of female prostitutes at risk of HIV infection and other sexually transmissible diseases. Genitourinary Med. 67:384-8.
113. Pineda JA, Aguado I, Rivero A, et al. (1992). HIV-1 infection among non-intravenous drug user female prostitutes in Spain. No evidence of evolution to Pattern II. AIDS 6:1365-1369.
114. McKeagney N, Barnard M, Leyland A, Coote I, Follet E. (1992). Female streetworking prostitution and HIV infection in Glasgow. Brit. Med. J. 305:801-804.
115. Anonymous. (1993). HIV infection in European female sex workers: epidemiological link with use of petroleum-based lubricants. European Working Group on HIV Infection in Female Prostitutes. AIDS 7:401-8.
116. Anonymous. (1998). The HIV/AIDS/STD epidemics in Asia and the Pacific. Australian HIV Surveillance Report 14:1-8.
117. Samrith C. Official HIV and AIDS Case Report. Phnom Penh: World Health Organisation, 1997.
118. McLaws ML, Brown ARD, Cunningham PH, Imrie AA, Wilcken B, Cooper DA. (1989). Prevalence of maternal HIV infection based on anonymous testing of neonates, Sydney 1989. Med. J. Aust. 153:383-386.
119. Lundberg GD. (1988). Serological diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus infection by Western Blot testing. JAMA 260:674-679.
120. Wooldridge HCM, Services MfHaF. Copy of letter sent to Senator Christopher Ellison, 1997.
121. Phair J, Jacobson L, Detals R, et al. (1992). Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Occuring Within 5 Years of Infection with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type-1: The Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study. J. Acquir. Immun. Defic. Syndr. 5:490-496.
122. Melbye M, Begtrup K, Rosenberg PS, et al. (1998). Differences in susceptibility to AIDS development: A cohort study of Danish and American homosexual-bisexual men, 1981-1995. J. Acq. Immune Def. Syndr. Hum. Retrovirol. 18:270-276.
123. Lemp GF, Porco TC, Hirozawa AM, et al. (1997). Projected incidence of AIDS in San Francisco: The peak and decline of the epidemic. J. Acq. Immune Def. Syndr. Hum. Retrovirol. 16:182-189.
124. St. Louis ME, Rauch KJ, Peterson LR, Anderson JE, Schable CA, Dondero TJ. (1990). Seroprevalence rates of human immunodeficiency virus infection at sentinel hospitals in the United States. NEJM 323:213-218.
125. Burke DS, Brundage JF, Redfield RR, et al. (1988). Measurement of the false positive rate in a screening program for human immunodeficiency virus infections. NEJM 319:961-964.
126. Dax E. (1994). The HIV Western blot: Reply to letter. Med. J. Aust. 160:808.
127. Kion TA, Hoffmann GW. (1991). Anti-HIV and anti-anti-MHC antibodies in alloimmune and autoimmune mice. Science 253:1138-1140.
128. Genesca J, Jett BW, Epstein JS, Shih JWK, Hewlett IK, Alter HJ. (1989). What do Western Blot indeterminate patterns for Human Immunodeficiency Virus mean in EIA-negative blood donors? Lancet ii:1023-1025.
129. Kozhemiakin LA, Bondarenko IG. (1992). Genomic instability and AIDS. Biochimiia 57:1417-1426.
130. Strandstrom HV, Higgins JR, Mossie K, Theilen GH. (1990). Studies with canine sera that contain antibodies which recognize human immunodeficiency virus structural proteins. Cancer Res. 50:5628s-5630s.
131. Kashala O, Marlink R, Ilunga M, et al. (1994). Infection with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and human T cell lymphotropic viruses among leprosy patients and contacts: correlation between HIV-1 cross-reactivity and antibodies to lipoarabinomannan. J. Infect. Dis. 169:296-304.
132. Mason AL, Xu L, Guo L, et al. (1998). Detection of retroviral antibodies in primary biliary cirrhosis and other idiopathic biliary disorders. Lancet 351:1620-1624.
133. Chant K, Lowe D, Rubin G, et al. (1993). Patient-to-patient transmission of HIV in private consulting surgical consulting rooms. Lancet 342:1548-1549.
134. Turner VF, Papadopulous-Eleopulos E. (1994). Patient to patient transmission of HIV in a surgeon's private rooms: Invited deposition to the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. At website www.virusmyth.com/aids/perthgroup/ .
135. Sinoussi F, Mendiola L, Chermann JC. (1973). Purification and partial differentiation of the particles of murine sarcoma virus (M. MSV) according to their sedimentation rates in sucrose density gradients. Spectra 4:237-243.
136. Toplin I. (1973). Tumor Virus Purification using Zonal Rotors. Spectra 225-235.
137. Bess JW, Gorelick RJ, Bosche WJ, Henderson LE, Arthur LO. (1997). Microvesicles are a source of contaminating cellular proteins found in purified HIV-1 preparations. Virol. 230:134-144.
138. Gluschankof P, Mondor I, Gelderblom HR, Sattentau QJ. (1997). Cell membrane vesicles are a major contaminant of gradient-enriched human immunodeficiency virus type-1 preparations. Virol. 230:125-133.
139. Beard JW. (1957). Physical methods for the analysis of cells. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 69:530-544.
140. Grafe A. (1991). A history of experimental virology. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1991.
141. Panem S. (1979). C Type Virus Expression in the Placenta. Curr. Top. Pathol. 66:175-189.
142. Gallo RC, Wong-Staal F, Reitz M, Gallagher RE, Miller N, Gillepsie DH. Some evidence for infectious type-C virus in humans. (1976). p. 385-405 In: Animal Virology Balimore D, Huang AS, Fox CF, eds Academic Press Inc., New York.
143. Hockley DJ, Wood RD, Jacobs JP. (1988). Electron Microscopy of Human Immunodeficiency Virus. J. Gen. Virol. 69:2455-2469.
144. Lecatsas G, Taylor MB. (1986). Pleomorphism in HTLV-III, the AIDS virus. S. Afr. Med. J. 69:793-794.
145. O'Hara CJ, Groopmen JE, Federman M. (1988). The Ultrastructural and Immunohistochemical Demonstration of Viral Particles in Lymph Nodes from Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Related Lymphadenopathy Syndromes. Hum. Pathol. 19:545-549.
146. Varmus H. (1987). Reverse Transcription. Sci. Am. 257:48-54.
147. Varmus HE. (1989). Reverse transcription in bacteria. Cell 56:721-724.
148. Gallo RC, Sarin PS, Wu AM. On the nature of the Nucleic Acids and RNA Dependent DNA Polymerase from RNA Tumor Viruses and Human Cells. (1973). p. 13-34 In: Possible Episomes in Eukaryotes Silvestri LG, ed North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
149. Tomley FM, Armstrong SJ, Mahy BWJ, Owen LN. (1983). Reverse transcriptase activity and particles of retroviral density in cultured canine lymphosarcoma supernatants. Br. J. Cancer 47:277-284. 150. Christie H. Interview with Dr. Robert Gallo July 1st Palexpo Conference Centre Geneva. [Betacam]. New York, 1998.
151. Peuchmaur M, Delfraissy JF, Pons JC, et al. (1991). HIV proteins absent from placentas of 75 HIV-1-positive women studied by immunohistochemistry. AIDS 5:741-5.
152. Faulk WP, Labarrere CA. (1991). HIV proteins in normal human placentae. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology 25:99-104.
153. Stott EM. (1991). Anti-cell antibody in macaques. Nature 353:393.
154. Arthur LO, Bess JW, Jr., Urban RG, et al. (1995). Macaques immunized with HLA-DR are protected from challenge with simian immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. 69:3117-24.
155. Eigen M, Schuster P. (1977). The hypercycle. Die Naturwissenschaften 64:541-565.
156. Eigen M, Gardiner W, Schuster P, Winkler-Oswatitsch R. (1981). The origin of genetic information. Sci. Am. 224:78-94.
157. Gallagher RE, Gallo RC. (1975). Type C RNA Tumor Virus Isolated from Cultured Human Acute Myelogenous Leukemia Cells. Science 187:350-353.
158. Barbacid M, Bolognesi D, Aaronson SA. (1980). Humans have antibodies capable of recognizing oncoviral glycoproteins: Demonstration that these antibodies are formed in response to cellular modification of glycoproteins rather than as consequence of exposure to virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 77:1617-1621.
159. Snyder HW, Fleissner E. (1980). Specificity of human antibodies to oncovirus glycoproteins: Recognition of antigen by natural antibodies directed against carbohydrate structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 77:1622-1626.
160. Kurth R, Teich NM, Weiss R, Oliver RTD. (1977). Natural human antibodies reactive with primate type-C antigens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A 74:1237-1241.
161. Casarett DJ, Lantos JD. (1998). Have we treated AIDS too well? Rationing and the future of AIDS exceptionalism. Ann. Int. Med. 128:756-759.
162. Anonymous. (1998). The National AIDS Registry. Australian HIV Surveillance Report 14:14.
163. Balter M. (1998). Europe: AIDS research on a budget. Science 280:1856-1858.
164. Stine GJ. Testing for Human Immunodeficiency Virus. (1995). p. 231 In: AIDS Update 1994-1995 Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
165. Glover E. (1998). French panel calls for closer monitoring of genetic modification. Nature 394:4.

[Brocke]

I won't go quietly
a film by Anne Sono

VIDEO PREVIEW (12:37)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok6qNSevmGI

Three women, one diagnosis. All HIV positive, none ill. What difficulties must women face if they reject the recommended drugs?

These untold stories will not be found in commercial films or in the news. This trailer is a beginning, a sharing of new wisdom. Visit the filmmakers' site in order to support the film's completion, the creation of a full length documentary reaching a worldwide audience.


These stories are not told in the official media. We imagined ourselves in a land of freedom of the press, but what the interests of the pharmaceutical industry runs counter to be subject to censorship. Since the swine flu, we know that it does not shrink about to invent diseases and pandemics, in order to sell pharmaceutical products. You have the opportunity to help ensure that the public learns what is behind HIV.

http://www.bluebell.de/englisch
http://www.bluebell.de/aids

http://www.rethinkingaids.com/

[Brocke]

The other side of AIDs (Robin Scovill) 2004
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-266890172132861595#




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Other_Side_of_AIDS

The Other Side of AIDS is a 2004 documentary film by Robin Scovill. Through interviews with prominent AIDS denialists and HIV-positive people who have refused anti-HIV medication, the film makes the claim that HIV is not the cause of AIDS and that HIV treatments are harmful, conclusions which are rejected by medical and scientific consensus. The film was reviewed in Variety and The Hollywood Reporter in 2004, and received additional attention in 2005, when Scovill's three-year-old daughter died of untreated AIDS.

The Other Side of AIDS was shown at the AFI Los Angeles International Film Festival in 2004, where it received special mention in the International Documentary category.[2][3] The film had its international premiere at the 2004 Vancouver International Film Festival,[4] and also played at the Buenos Aires International Festival of Independent Cinema in Argentina.

[agentbluescreen]

The "We don't want to pay to treat it" side of HIV propaganda.
Would you prefer people with trace HIV infections (whatever that is or isn't) not being treated or boycotting treatment and thus spreading it further and wider?
Promoting weird opinion-theories and opinions that certain old HIV treatments are some drug scam as some reactionary films and videos have done is one thing but the fact that AIDS/HIV doctors face every day is the certainty that those who refuse or fail to take their modern single-dose combined anti retroviral and protease inhibitor medications (like ATRIPLA the latest. most effective and well tolerated 3rd generation non AZT single daily pill consisting of efavirenze/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) drugs inevitably sicken with one or more AIDS related opportunistic infection symptoms, return to being a more serious source of infection and risk to others and then require more expensive and more likely to be less effective multiple dose combinations.  All the experience in treatment suggests that these improved treatments prevent viral loads from increasing and improve white blood cell counts to the point that patients have undetectable infection and healthy immune systems. With steady use such drugs patents are shown to be effectively 'cured' of the spread or effects of HIV, and do not develop nor spread it to others.

When they stop taking them or even miss doses, the still-latent infection mutates and grows and that simplest solution no longer works on their infection, necessitating them to have to move to more primitive and difficult to take multiple dose (not one a day) combinations, that are not as effective and even more likely to be missed and have far worse other side effects.

This is not any isolated study result, nor unscientific whack-job opinion, it is the incontrovertible and indisputable proven truth and rule of HIV treatment that doctors face every day. No matter what HIV is or isn't or has been identified as or not, people with this who don't take their meds get worse and ALWAYS become progressively more untreatable - PERIOD! That is all we need to know for now.

While it may be fashionable to question things and indeed question everything, and make up grand theories based on foolish assumptions and wishful thinking, people's lives are at risk here and basic common sense and experience must prevail. There are not so bad treatments for HIV that aren't hurting anyone (save monetarily) and are working very well. Big private for private profit-off-of-misfortune, private greedy disease repair gambling-casino corporations also have "anti-expensive-drug" agendas just as "green" oil-pollution corporations want silly carbon=tax schemes and want to make governments give them astronomically high fuel prices due to 'globalist warmingness" to fill their pockets.

People also have to learn to discern Insurancist propaganda from Pharmacist truth.

[Brocke]

The "We don't want to pay to treat it" side of HIV propaganda.
Would you prefer people with trace HIV infections (whatever that is or isn't) not being treated or boycotting treatment and thus spreading it further and wider?
Promoting weird opinion-theories and opinions that certain old HIV treatments are some drug scam as some reactionary films and videos have done is one thing but the fact that AIDS/HIV doctors face every day is the certainty that those who refuse or fail to take their modern single-dose combined anti retroviral and protease inhibitor medications (like ATRIPLA the latest. most effective and well tolerated 3rd generation non AZT single daily pill consisting of efavirenze/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) drugs inevitably sicken with one or more AIDS related opportunistic infection symptoms, return to being a more serious source of infection and risk to others and then require more expensive and more likely to be less effective multiple dose combinations.  All the experience in treatment suggests that these improved treatments prevent viral loads from increasing and improve white blood cell counts to the point that patients have undetectable infection and healthy immune systems. With steady use such drugs patents are shown to be effectively 'cured' of the spread or effects of HIV, and do not develop nor spread it to others.

When they stop taking them or even miss doses, the still-latent infection mutates and grows and that simplest solution no longer works on their infection, necessitating them to have to move to more primitive and difficult to take multiple dose (not one a day) combinations, that are not as effective and even more likely to be missed and have far worse other side effects.

This is not any isolated study result, nor unscientific whack-job opinion, it is the incontrovertible and indisputable proven truth and rule of HIV treatment that doctors face every day. No matter what HIV is or isn't or has been identified as or not, people with this who don't take their meds get worse and ALWAYS become progressively more untreatable - PERIOD! That is all we need to know for now.

While it may be fashionable to question things and indeed question everything, and make up grand theories based on foolish assumptions and wishful thinking, people's lives are at risk here and basic common sense and experience must prevail. There are not so bad treatments for HIV that aren't hurting anyone (save monetarily) and are working very well. Big private for private profit-off-of-misfortune, private greedy disease repair gambling-casino corporations also have "anti-expensive-drug" agendas just as "green" oil-pollution corporations want silly carbon=tax schemes and want to make governments give them astronomically high fuel prices due to 'globalist warmingness" to fill their pockets.

People also have to learn to discern Insurancist propaganda from Pharmacist truth.

The point of this thread and others at Prison Planet Forum on this subject are because:

• HIV has NEVER been isolated
• Prof. Peter Duesberg PhD (the first person to ever isolate the genetic structure of a Retrovirus) is the leading critic of the HIV causes AIDS models.
• The basic assumtion that AIDS is infective has NEVER been tested OR proven. It is an ASSUMPTION.
• 99% of ALL diseases that effect those of us in the developed Western World are NOT caused by viruses.
• Doctors and scientists are now inditing the most harmless and most difficult to detect viruses with technology that is designed to discover a "needle in a haystack" and blame those viruses for fatal diseases under conditions where they are virtually undetectable in a patient, like HIV and AIDS.
• The ELISA and Western blot tests DO NOT detect HIV. They detect antibodies that could be present because of HIV (a virus that has never been isolated).
• The ELISA and Western blot tests give false positives at rates that are alarming especially considering that once you have been labeled HIV positive you are NEVER considered free of the disease. Even if the very same tests find you negative at a later date.
• In 2009 alone Gilead Sciences profited $4 billion with their AIDS drug Viread. This drug has been on the market for 12 years. The profits that pharmaceutical companies are making of off highly toxic drugs to treat a yet unproven disease is staggering. There are 28 such drugs on the market.
• People that have been "tested" HIV positive live longer if they refuse treatment and do not take the prescribed drugs.

[wvoutlaw2002]

Clicking on the Vodpod link shows:

"Sorry, this video does not exist."

The truth is being censored.

Here's a torrent.

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/5605555/House_Of_Numbers(UN_Wants_You_Dead_)(AIDS_A_Fantasy)

[Tokiem]

The following link is that of an Alex Jones audio interview with the late Dr. Boyd Graves on November 5, 2007;

http://www.archive.org/details/alex.jones.interviews.boyd.graves.about.aids

[kerrymti]

This link is the whole film in excellent quality.

http://vodpod.com/watch/4695991-house-of-numbers

bad link...says video doesn't exist.

[kerrymti]

I don't know if this has previously been posted, but I found it interesting.  Anyone know any updates concerning this?  I have been looking all afternoon.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5676977.PN.&OS=PN/5676977&RS=PN/5676977

Excerpt:

United States Patent  5,676,977

Antelman  October 14, 1997 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method of curing AIDS with tetrasilver tetroxide molecular crystal devices


Abstract
The diamagnetic semiconducting molecular crystal tetrasilver tetroxide (Ag.sub.4 O.sub.4) is utilized for destroying the AIDS virus, destroying AIDS synergistic pathogens and immunity suppressing moieties (ISM) in humans. A single intravenous injection of the devices is all that is required for efficacy at levels of about 40 PPM of human blood. The device molecular crystal contains two mono and two trivalent silver ions capable of "firing" electrons capable of electrocuting the AIDS virus, pathogens and ISM. When administered into the bloodstream, the device electrons will be triggered by pathogens, a proliferating virus and ISM, and when fired will simultaneously trigger a redox chelation mechanism resulting in divalent silver moieties which chelate and bind active sites of the entities destroying them. The devices are completely non-toxic. However, they put stress on the liver causing hepatomegaly, but there is no loss of liver function.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inventors:  Antelman; Marvin S. (Rehovot, IL) 
Assignee: Antelman Technologies Ltd. (Providence, RI)
 
Appl. No.:  08/658,955
Filed:  May 31, 1996
What is claimed is:

1. A method of treating AIDS-afflicted humans comprising injecting a multitude of tetrasilver tetroxide molecular crystals into the bloodstream of the human subject.

2. A method for increasing white blood cell counts in AIDS-afflicted humans comprising injecting a multitude of tetrasilver tetroxide molecular crystals into the bloodstream of the human subject.

3. Methods of treating AIDS-affilicted humans according to claims 1-2 where the concentration of said molecular crystals is approximately 40 PPM of the total blood weight of the human subject.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Description

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to the employment of molecular crystals as anti-AIDS devices, but more particularly to the molecular crystal semiconductor tetrasilver tetroxide Ag.sub.4 O.sub.4 which has two monovalent and two trivalent silver ions per molecule, and which through this structural configuration enables intermolecular electron transfer capable of killing viruses and binding them to the resulting silver entity so that a single intravenous injection will completely obliterate acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) in humans. Furthermore, said devices are capable of killing pathogens and purging the bloodstream of immune suppressing moieties (ISM) whether or not created by the AIDS virus (HIV); so as to restore the immune system.

The present invention is based on concepts previously elucidated in applicant's U.S. Pat. No. 5,336,499 which discloses the destruction and inhibition of bacteria, algae and the AIDS virus in nutrient life supporting systems by using said silver oxide devices. Example 3 of said patent discloses that 18 PPM of said crystal devices could totally suppress the AIDS virus (page 6, line 5). Subsequent to the filing of the aforementioned patent, further testing revealed complete 100% destruction of the AIDS virus in vitro at 20 PPM, and the fact that said devices were harmless when ingested and inhaled, being non-toxic.

Encouraged by these evaluations and successes, applicant obtained permission to evaluate the crystals in vitro against murine acquired immune deficiency syndrome (MAIDS). Only one facility in the State of Israel is licensed for these evaluations, namely, the Kaplan Hospital in Rehovot, Israel, which is affiliated with the Hebrew University-Hadassah Medical School where said evaluations were done.

The initial evaluations entailed experimenting with various silver moieties cited in applicant's aforementioned patent, concentrations, non-reactive buffers and modes of administration. After about 18 months of judicious efforts and initial failures, success was finally achieved in destroying the MAIDS virus in C57BL mice with a single intravenous injection. The results of this test program comprise Example 5 of U.S. Pat. No. 5,336,499. After success with mice, the inventor was able to test the efficacy of said devices on two select etiological groups of terminal AIDS patients in a clinic in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, Central America.

The AIDS patients comprised the etiological subgroups, Candidiasis and Wasting Syndrome. Current indicator diseases for diagnosing AIDS which have been expanded by the CDC, fall into the following five major categories with the approximate percent distribution among AIDS patients:

______________________________________ 1. P. carinii pneumonia 51% 2. Wasting syndrome 19% 3. Candidiasis 13% 4. Kaposi's sarcoma 11% 5. Dementia 6% ______________________________________

This invention concerns itself with the treatment and cure of candidiasis and wasting syndrome AIDS patients with Tetrasil*. These two groups account for approximately one third of AIDS cases.

Stedman's Medical Dictionary (Williams & Wilken's 26th Ed., 1995) defines wasting syndrome "as a condition of 10% weight loss in conjunction with diarrhea or fever . . . Associated with AIDS (p. 1744)."

OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION

The main object of the invention is to provide for a molecular scale device of a single tetrasilver tetroxide crystalline molecule capable of restoring the immunity of AIDS afflicted humans of the two AIDS etiological subgroups, candidiasis and wasting syndrome.

Another object of the invention is to provide for immunity restoration in said AIDS afflicted humans through a single injection.

Another object of this invention is to destroy ISM in humans manifesting AIDS diseases of said AIDS etiological subgroups irrespective as to whether said ISM was HIV induced, since it is known that humans may manifest AIDS and still be HIV negative, and thus restore the immune system in said humans.

Another object of this invention is to destroy the AIDS virus when present in the systems of said AIDS afflicted humans.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to a molecular scale device not only capable of destroying the AIDS virus, but of purging the human bloodstream of pathogens and restoring immunity to AIDS patients of the candidiasis and wasting syndrome categories. Said molecular device consists of a single crystal of tetrasilver tetroxide (Ag.sub.4 O.sub.4). The crystal lattice of this molecule has a unique structure since it is a diamagnetic semiconducting crystal containing two mono and two trivalent silver ions, which in effect are capable of "firing" electrons under certain conditions which will destroy AIDS viruses, other pathogens and immune suppressing moieties (ISM), not only through the electrocution mode, but also by a binding process which occurs simultaneously with electron firing, namely, binding and chelation of divalent silver, i.e., the resulting product of the electron transfer redox that occur when the monovalent silver ions are oxidized and the trivalent ions are reduced in the crystal. The binding/chelation effect occurs at active sites of the AIDS virus, pathogens and ISM. Because of the extremely minute size of a single molecule of this crystal, several million of these devices may be employed in concert to destroy a virus colony to purge a life support system of ISM and pathogens with the consumption of only parts per trillion of the crystal devices. Thus an optimum of 40 PPM of the devices by weight of human blood was found to be sufficient to completely obliterate AIDS. This concentration is slightly over double of the optimum concentration recommended in applicant's aforementioned U.S. patent for the destruction of the human AIDS virus in vitro. Other details concerning the structure of the crystal and its mechanism against pathogens, the AIDS virus and ISM would analogously hold here, and have already been further elucidated in said patent.

The actual destruction of pathogens, ISM and the AIDS virus is effectuated by injection of a suspension of these devices in distilled or deionized water with a non-reacting electrolyte directly, i.e. intravenously, into the bloodstream. A single injection is all that is required under these conditions. Accordingly, humans injected in this manner, upon being inspected after three weeks or more had elapsed and compared with similar humans that had been given placebos, were completely cured of AIDS. The control group still manifested AIDS. Accordingly, the tetrasilver tetroxide device performed in concert with and in full conformity with the ultimate objects of this invention. Furthermore, three out of four wasting syndrome terminal patients and four out of the five candidiasis terminal patients were still alive in 1995 after a year and a half had elapsed from their initial injection. By that time all the AIDS patients had been released from the clinic and allowed to return home.

Other objects and features of the present invention shall become apparent to those skilled in the art when the present invention is considered in view of the accompanying examples. It should, of course, be recognized that the accompanying examples illustrate preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended as a means of defining the limits and scope of the present invention.

EXAMPLE 1

Five patients afflicted with AIDS of the candidiasis etiological category were segregated for Tetrasil treatment. The rationale for selecting them was based on facts presented in an article by Peter H. Duesberg and Brian J. Ellison entitled "Is The AIDS Virus A Science Fiction?" (Policy Review, Summer 1990 pp. 40-51). Only the factual presentations of the article were utilized and the hypothesis of the authors was ignored. The facts presented in the article related to the method of selecting AIDS patients based on the five aforementioned etiological subgroups targeted by the CDC, and the evidence presented, that there is AIDS without HIV as well as with it so that an anti-viral agent in most instances will not necessarily restore the immunity system.

Evaluations with Tetrasil were conducted on AIDS patients at Lucha Contra el Sida, Comayaguela, Honduras. The patients two weeks prior to inoculation were removed from their AZT, AIDS therapy. Tetrasil was administered at approximately 40 PPM of blood volume per patient as a suspension in a proprietary buffer solution (pH=6.5), supplied by Holipharm Corporation.

The results of evaluations with candidiasis are tabulated in Table I under its disease category. All patients evaluated were terminal. Some, however, were in moderate (m) condition and others in poor (p) as designated in the Table. The I and F designations refer to initial and final values as shown. WBC indicates white cell blood count. The H column, following CD 8, indicates whether hepatomegaly occurred. This was an unfortunate consequence of the treatment which resulted in enlarged livers in all patients except the second one. Despite hepatomegaly, there was no interference with liver function.

The onset of hepatomegaly was not spontaneous and varied from patient to patient, being in the range of 4-16 days.

It should also be noted that shortly after injection of Tetrasil there were indications of fever (symbolized by T in the Ag.sub.4 O.sub.4 column), sometimes accompanied by fatigue (F). The body temperature was invariably 38.5.degree. C. (101.3.degree. F.). This was indicative of restoration of the immune response of the body, since normally the body will destroy pathogens when the immune system is functional by raising the temperature. The patient who died; first responded favorably to Diflucan, which previously gave no response. He was cured of his candidiasis, but unfortunately succumbed to his previous body damage. All the other candidiasis syndrome people who previously did not respond to the indicated medications subsequently responded after the Tetrasil treatment. Further evidence of the recovery of the AIDS patients manifested itself 30 days after the initial injection when white blood cell counts were taken. They are shown in Table I under the WBC column, which gives the initial and final WBC. All candidiasis patients showed a dramatic increase in their white blood cell counts, indicative of the restoration of their immunity systems.

EXAMPLE 2

The above protocol of Example 1 was repeated with AIDS patients exhibiting wasting syndrome. The results of their treatment are tabulated in Table I under the disease category of said syndrome. It should be noted that two of the four wasting syndrome patients showed improved white blood counts. The female patient, whose condition improved from poor and terminal to be among the living, showed a decrease in the WBC. However, she showed an increase in body temperature which was indicative of immune response. The test results indicate that one cannot rely on a single factor to indicate the demise of AIDS. The usual HIV marker CD 4 initial and final are irrelevant. ISM suppression appears to be more critical than the destruction of HIV. AIDS was suppressed, any permanent damage that had been done to the patients in the course of their succumbing to AIDS was not obviously cured or corrected by said crystal device treatment, rather said injury persisted and the patient was improved with respect to AIDS but still suffered from said permanent injury or impairment previously inflicted.

[agentbluescreen]

Very interesting and hopeful patent application for a cure, but the ridiculous notion put forth here by Brocke that
 

People that have been "tested" HIV positive live longer if they refuse treatment and do not take the prescribed drugs.

is an insulting fabrication and a completely wrong headed and facetious, extremely harmful, foolish and distressingly stupid pack of lies.

People who have been diagnosed and are being treated early with modern expensive and effective drugs are living long, good and healthy lives and will no longer die from it, whatever-the-heck-it-is or isn't. Such proven medical science may only be a treatment and not be the cure but that is an entirely different matter.

Advising anyone to not be tested, not alter their sexual behavior, not accept treatment and not to pay attention to the risk that poses to themselves and others (until they do or don't get 'sick") is criminally irresponsible and idiotic.

[dtk]

hahahha. Just watch the doc and see what all the fuss is about.

[RonPaulRocks]

Very interesting and hopeful patent application for a cure, but the ridiculous notion put forth here by Brocke that
 
is an insulting fabrication and a completely wrong headed and facetious, extremely harmful, foolish and distressingly stupid pack of lies.

People who have been diagnosed and are being treated early with modern expensive and effective drugs are living long, good and healthy lives and will no longer die from it, whatever-the-heck-it-is or isn't. Such proven medical science may only be a treatment and not be the cure but that is an entirely different matter.

Advising anyone to not be tested, not alter their sexual behavior, not accept treatment and not to pay attention to the risk that poses to themselves and others (until they do or don't get 'sick") is criminally irresponsible and idiotic.

This is where you are wrong sir.  I respectfully disagree.

Watch the film "House Of Numbers" and also research Dr. Deusberg and look into the issue deeper.  "HIV Positive" = The system can pump you full of poison and kill your ass and blame it on the virus. 

If someone does nothing about being "HIV positive" then they will live a normal life because it does nothing.  The drugs and stress do it all.

[RonPaulRocks]

You have to watch the documentary.  All the most prominent people involved in the discovery, research are interviewed in the film.

The vodpod link was erased but it is available through torrents and Netflix as well as buying the Dvd from the filmmakers website.

http://www.houseofnumbers.com

[agentbluescreen]

This is where you are wrong sir.  I respectfully disagree.

Watch the film "House Of Numbers" and also research Dr. Deusberg and look into the issue deeper.  "HIV Positive" = The system can pump you full of poison and kill your ass and blame it on the virus. 

If someone does nothing about being "HIV positive" then they will live a normal life because it does nothing.  The drugs and stress do it all.

Tell that to the hundreds of friends, dozens of really close friends, and especially to the two partners and one adopted stepchild over the course of 25 difficult years I had die in my own arms of it. You are completely wrong, doctors, drugs or "stress" didn't kill any of them, HIV did. Believing total bulls hit like what you just repeated, not being treated effectively and/or waiting until too late to be treated (because drugs were then primitive and poisonous which they NOW no longer are) and repeatedly going on and off (better but still not as good as todays) meds after reading such tripe and thus getting sicker and sicker all the time did.

You are dreaming in technicolor if you think that the Constantinian Fascist Union of Zionist Socialist Republic's "American" Navy eugenicist's lab-mutated weaponized HIV viral organism is not a cloaked pseudo-retroviral disease specifically tailored, disbursed, conceived and engineered to kill-off gays, blacks, latinos, natives, loose women and uncircumcised men (and eventually us all) with.

I happen to do volunteer work with an AIDS Committee now and shall continue to and can certify 100% to you that hundreds and thousands of people are healthy and living (nominally) well on these great new drugs and none of them are getting sick or dying anymore unless they go off their meds listening to or falling for stale old tripe like this.

Giving anyone else your HIV is a crime of stupidity, selfishness and ignorance no matter what-the-hell-it-is or isn't, looks or doesn't look like or does or doesn't necessarily "do" to you on it's own. It doesn't kill anybody, it progressively allows your bodies own defenses to go dormant to let all kinds of other things inexorably and irreversibly get chances to do ever more of that.

I've seen this movie, it is both informative about what the criminal/medical lab investigators have not yet uncovered about this cloaked killer, and about how many bad primitive drug therapies actually did more harm than good and about how tracking the spread of this "hard to get" viral pandemic is rather difficult to pin down because of social mores and established corporate religious-fascist societal censorship taboos.

The simple fact is that "receptive" sexual partners are most susceptible to getting it, yet saliva's acidity kills it. As in sharing needles. ear rings or razors, (bad) it requires a fluid to bloodstream transmission path, yet rather exceptionally can also easily reverse-infect any tiniest covered, festering abrasion under a foreskin. It needs to pass through an internal wound that must heal "internally". The transmission mode is that it needs to "bleed in" to your bloodstream. If it's just on a bleeding cut or (or in) a scab it's likewise trapped/ejected and long gone (bled out). As a result, getting it from contamination of an everyday exterior "bleed out" cut is really rare. Also, while any male "top" can get and give it, circumcised "exclusive tops" are least likely of all to get it, yet women and sexual "bottoms" are all most vulnerable. By and large the largest number of the highest risk male groups (bi, bottom and/or vers) simply won't ever freely admit to getting it that way.

This societal taboo (sodomy) combined with "secreted" gay and bisexual behaviors creates statistical data survey problems that are misleading, incomprehensible and incongruous to "straight" researchers, leading to other bad (broader) theories of transmission or dumb questions as to the nature of or existence of the disease as a viral agent, itself. Thankfully sexually knowledgeable people wouldn't be fooled by these "rather odd" transmission vector studies and didn't get caught in this trap.

Live safely, take precautions, be tested, care for yourselves and others and stay well. Numbers can also count lies. Don't ever think that it doesn't exist, you won't get it or that it won't hurt you or that it won't kill you, pay attention to not getting it. There is balm in Gilead - for now at least. Pardon me for offering you this topical historical reference from a corporatist 'his'story slavery manual, but I'm sure Our Savior would:

Jeremiah 8 22
    Is there no balm in Gilead?
    Is there no physician there?
    Why then has the health of my poor people
    not been restored?

[RonPaulRocks]

Tell that to the hundreds of friends, dozens of really close friends, and especially to the two partners and one adopted stepchild over the course of 25 difficult years I had die in my own arms of it. You are completely wrong, doctors, drugs or "stress" didn't kill any of them, HIV did. Believing total bulls hit like what you just repeated, not being treated effectively and/or waiting until too late to be treated (because drugs were then primitive and poisonous which they NOW no longer are) and repeatedly going on and off (better but still not as good as todays) meds after reading such tripe and thus getting sicker and sicker all the time did.

You are dreaming in technicolor if you think that the Constantinian Fascist Union of Zionist Socialist Republic's "American" Navy eugenicist's lab-mutated weaponized HIV viral organism is not a cloaked pseudo-retroviral disease specifically tailored, disbursed, conceived and engineered to kill-off gays, blacks, latinos, natives, loose women and uncircumcised men (and eventually us all) with.

I happen to do volunteer work with an AIDS Committee now and shall continue to and can certify 100% to you that hundreds and thousands of people are healthy and living (nominally) well on these great new drugs and none of them are getting sick or dying anymore unless they go off their meds listening to or falling for stale old tripe like this.

Giving anyone else your HIV is a crime of stupidity, selfishness and ignorance no matter what-the-hell-it-is or isn't, looks or doesn't look like or does or doesn't necessarily "do" to you on it's own. It doesn't kill anybody, it progressively allows your bodies own defenses to go dormant to let all kinds of other things inexorably and irreversibly get chances to do ever more of that.

I've seen this movie, it is both informative about what the criminal/medical lab investigators have not yet uncovered about this cloaked killer, and about how many bad primitive drug therapies actually did more harm than good and about how tracking the spread of this "hard to get" viral pandemic is rather difficult to pin down because of social mores and established corporate religious-fascist societal censorship taboos.

The simple fact is that "receptive" sexual partners are most susceptible to getting it, yet saliva's acidity kills it. As in sharing needles. ear rings or razors, (bad) it requires a fluid to bloodstream transmission path, yet rather exceptionally can also easily reverse-infect any tiniest covered, festering abrasion under a foreskin. It needs to pass through an internal wound that must heal "internally". The transmission mode is that it needs to "bleed in" to your bloodstream. If it's just on a bleeding cut or (or in) a scab it's likewise trapped/ejected and long gone (bled out). As a result, getting it from contamination of an everyday exterior "bleed out" cut is really rare. Also, while any male "top" can get and give it, circumcised "exclusive tops" are least likely of all to get it, yet women and sexual "bottoms" are all most vulnerable. By and large the largest number of the highest risk male groups (bi, bottom and/or vers) simply won't ever freely admit to getting it that way.

This societal taboo (sodomy) combined with "secreted" gay and bisexual behaviors creates statistical data survey problems that are misleading, incomprehensible and incongruous to "straight" researchers, leading to other bad (broader) theories of transmission or dumb questions as to the nature of or existence of the disease as a viral agent, itself. Thankfully sexually knowledgeable people wouldn't be fooled by these "rather odd" transmission vector studies and didn't get caught in this trap.

Live safely, take precautions, be tested, care for yourselves and others and stay well. Numbers can also count lies. Don't ever think that it doesn't exist, you won't get it or that it won't hurt you or that it won't kill you, pay attention to not getting it. There is balm in Gilead - for now at least. Pardon me for offering you this topical historical reference from a corporatist 'his'story slavery manual, but I'm sure Our Savior would:

Jeremiah 8 22
    Is there no balm in Gilead?
    Is there no physician there?
    Why then has the health of my poor people
    not been restored?

Dude just watch the documentary.  I know you are hyped up about it.  But there is very good information in the film.  Watch it.  I felt the same way about 9/11 until I saw 9/11 Mysteries and Loose Change.

[Brocke]

Rethinking AIDS 2009 - SIDA 2009 - History of the AIDS controversy - 1/2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3VBdc83Hmg

Dispatches - AIDS THE UNHEARD VOICES Part 1 Dispatches, Channel 4, 1987
VIDEO REMOVED see next post. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLrGwY0A0Ks

Dispatches - THE AIDS CATCH Part 1 Dispatches, Channel 4 1990
VIDEO REMOVED see next post. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHaPhmDgG3Y

[Brocke]

Rethinking AIDS 2009 - SIDA 2009 - History of the AIDS controversy - 1/2  Dispatches, Channel 4, 1987
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3VBdc83Hmg

Dispatches - AIDS THE UNHEARD VOICES Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLrGwY0A0Ks

Dispatches - THE AIDS CATCH Part 1 Dispatches, Channel 4 1990
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHaPhmDgG3Y

Well surprise, surprise. Someone has flagged the two Dispatch videos and they have been removed. I am re-posting and time stamping these links. Lets see how long they last this time. I have downloaded these videos and I will point to alternate links to them to anyone who PMs me.

These video are a must watch. I don't claim that they are accurate but I do believe they are important.

Video links posted [February 28, 2011, 04:04:35 PM]

AIDS The Unheard Voices
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNWKPryDabc
Dispatches, Channel 4, 1987

The AIDS Catch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNIOzRKTL9Y
Dispatches, Channel 4 1990

[kerrymti]

These video are a must watch. I don't claim that they are accurate but I do believe they are important.

Video links posted [February 28, 2011, 04:04:35 PM]

AIDS The Unheard Voices
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNWKPryDabc
Dispatches, Channel 4, 1987

The AIDS Catch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNIOzRKTL9Y
Dispatches, Channel 4 1990

Thanks for the links Brocke.  I have watched the first and watching the second now.  Do you know of any updates to the research that they were doing back then?  It would be interesting to see what has come up recently.

[Brocke]

Positively False
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvNIN8xcAMI

News Report, 1998
Challenges identification of HIV and highlights anomalies between different HIV test kits.


Joan Shenton, How Positive Are You?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm--ZBW0S38

After recovering from a drug-induced auto-immune disease that interrupted her career at the BBC, Joan Shenton started her scientific and medical documentary production company Meditel. After discovering Peter Duesberg's 1987 critique of the HIV=AIDS dogma in the journal Cancer Research she produced the documentary AIDS: The Unheard Voices and then The AIDS Catch. After a brief silence the establishment woke up and did not sleep until they had put her out of business although by this time Joan and Meditel had produced several more award-winning documentaries. In the past few years Joan has resurfaced, in fact she joined the board of Rethinking AIDS a few months ago, and in this discussion with Terry Michael and David Crowe discusses her thoughts on the rethinking movement then and now and her new video which just started shooting the day before taping of this podcast.

Joan's wonderful videos, and other historical video material, can be explored at her Immune Resource Foundation website. Her book Positively False is out of print but well worth reading if you can find a copy.

Some of Joans videos are on this youtube channel: Question HIV / AIDS rethinkingAIDS's Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/rethinkingAIDS#p/u/49/Cm--ZBW0S38

[kerrymti]

Positively False
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvNIN8xcAMI
Joan's wonderful videos, and other historical video material, can be explored at her Immune Resource Foundation website. Her book Positively False is out of print but well worth reading if you can find a copy.

Some of Joans videos are on this youtube channel: Question HIV / AIDS rethinkingAIDS's Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/rethinkingAIDS#p/u/49/Cm--ZBW0S38

Thanks, I will check it out.  My main goal in researching this is that three of my family members have SLE and according to the "experts" SLE and AIDS are nearly identical, with one of the major differences being that SLE is not contagious...and, there is not nearly as much research money spent on SLE.

[agentbluescreen]

Positively False
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvNIN8xcAMI

News Report, 1998
Challenges identification of HIV and highlights anomalies between different HIV test kits.


Joan Shenton, How Positive Are You?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm--ZBW0S38

After recovering from a drug-induced auto-immune disease that interrupted her career at the BBC, Joan Shenton started her scientific and medical documentary production company Meditel. After discovering Peter Duesberg's 1987 critique of the HIV=AIDS dogma in the journal Cancer Research she produced the documentary AIDS: The Unheard Voices and then The AIDS Catch. After a brief silence the establishment woke up and did not sleep until they had put her out of business although by this time Joan and Meditel had produced several more award-winning documentaries. In the past few years Joan has resurfaced, in fact she joined the board of Rethinking AIDS a few months ago, and in this discussion with Terry Michael and David Crowe discusses her thoughts on the rethinking movement then and now and her new video which just started shooting the day before taping of this podcast.

Joan's wonderful videos, and other historical video material, can be explored at her Immune Resource Foundation website. Her book Positively False is out of print but well worth reading if you can find a copy.

Some of Joans videos are on this youtube channel: Question HIV / AIDS rethinkingAIDS's Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/rethinkingAIDS#p/u/49/Cm--ZBW0S38

Thanks Brocke as sure as I am that HIV exists, there's no reason not to study and examine cases where it doesn't. Everybody makes mistakes, but some are obviously far worse than others.

[Brocke]

Strecker Memorandum - Good Quality Version

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9071841901084346228#docid=-1349285080949254539

1:36:42

The Strecker Memorandum is a 96 minute Video Tape and one of the most controversial video tapes you will ever see. Robert B. Strecker M.D. PhD, presents with document evidence the Truth about AIDS being a Man-Made Disease. In his video he lectures how the AIDS Virus was Predicted, Requested, Created and introduced into human population through Medical Injection Programs. Dr. Strecker practices Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology in Los Angeles as a trained pathologist, with a PhD in Pharmacology.

[Brocke]

The River



IT NOW SEEMS CERTAIN THAT HIV can be traced back to retroviruses found in certain species of African apes and monkeys. But why did these simian viruses suddenly transfer to the human species? Those who believe in a natural movement across the species barrier would be hard-pressed to explain why this transfer did not occur until the late twentieth century. Do we need to look elsewhere for the true source of HIV and AIDS?

With this question Edward Hooper begins his unprecedented investigation. The result is the most gripping and significant medical detective story of our time.

Having examined virtually every theory ever proposed to explain AIDS, Hooper became convinced that medical interventions made in Africa in the 1950s were themselves unwittingly responsible. Such a tragedy requires urgent examination.

Based on nine years of full-time research involving over six hundred interviews and the examination of four thousand books and articles, The River is certain to become the authoritative chronicle of the AIDS pandemic. This is an exceptionally compelling and vivid epic of investigation, adventure and revelation.


Documentary based on The River

The Origins of AIDS
A look at a controversial theory surrounding the origins of AIDS

Directed by Peter Chappell & Catherine Peix

Produced by Christine Le Goff, Arnie Gelbart, & Christine Pireaux (USA)
Screenplay (in English/French) by Peter Chappell & Stephane Horel
Photography (BW/C) by Peter Krieger & Mark Daniels
Edited by Catherine Peix
Music by Frederic Lagnau & Phillip Glass
Running Time: 1:32

THE ORIGIN OF AIDS pt 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml7q6iMwqLY

THE ORIGIN OF AIDS pt 2 (01:06 reference to a Rolling Stone Article about The Polio Vaccine and HIV)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2WhlelCF00

THE ORIGIN OF AIDS pt 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue6Q9YrHCng

THE ORIGIN OF AIDS pt 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrKC8fApK4o

THE ORIGIN OF AIDS pt 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py0NmK73soA

THE ORIGIN OF AIDS pt 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmOXEVwgsW8

http://www.uow.edu.au/~/bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/

[Brocke]

HIV=AIDS: Fact or Fraud?

One of the most powerful video documentaries of our time boldly reveals the modern medical-industrial complex's dire descent into utter corruption. This feature-length expose explains exactly how the 300-Billion-dollar AID$ fraud began, why HIV can NOT be the cause of AIDS, what the real causes could be, and who manipulates the public's good intentions while poisoning hundreds of thousands with toxic drugs that cause the very disease they are supposed to prevent. This is a systematic dissection of the HIV/AID$ machine and how they hijacked a program designed to fight a worldwide plight of human suffering and drove it down the road to hell. Yet this program offers hope, inspired by the courage and articulate arguments of a group of growing voices internationally challenging the HIV=AIDS=DEATH hysteria. A MUST SEE for anyone interested in truly understanding the facts about HIV/AID$.

AIDS=HIV Fact or Fraud? (13 parts)
http://www.youtube.com/user/AidsHoax

[Brocke]

Factors Known to Cause False-Positive HIV Antibody Test Results

    Anti-carbohydrate antibodies (52, 19, 13)
    Naturally-occurring antibodies (5, 19)
    Passive immunization: receipt of gamma globulin or immune globulin (as prophylaxis against infection which contains antibodies)(18, 26, 60, 4, 22, 42, 43, 13)
    Leprosy (2, 25)
    Tuberculosis (25)
    Mycobacterium avium (25)
    Systemic lupus erythematosus (15, 23)
    Renal (kidney) failure (48, 23, 13)
    Hemodialysis/renal failure (56, 16, 41, 10, 49)
    Alpha interferon therapy in hemodialysis patients (54)
    Flu (36)
    Flu vaccination (30, 11, 3, 20, 13, 43)
    Herpes simplex I (27)
    Herpes simplex II (11)
    Upper respiratory tract infection (cold or flu)(11)
    Recent viral infection or exposure to viral vaccines (11)
    Pregnancy in multiparous women (58, 53, 13, 43, 36)
    Malaria (6, 12)
    High levels of circulating immune complexes (6, 33)
    Hypergammaglobulinemia (high levels of antibodies) (40, 33)
    False positives on other tests, including RPR (rapid plasma reagent) test for syphilis (17, 48, 33, 10, 49)
    Rheumatoid arthritis (36)
    Hepatitis B vaccination (28, 21, 40, 43)
    Tetanus vaccination (40)
    Organ transplantation (1, 36)
    Renal transplantation (35, 9, 48, 13, 56)
    Anti-lymphocyte antibodies (56, 31)
    Anti-collagen antibodies (found in gay men, haemophiliacs, Africans of both sexes and people with leprosy)(31)
    Serum-positive for rheumatoid factor, antinuclear antibody (both found in rheumatoid arthritis and other autoantibodies)(14, 62, 53)
    Autoimmune diseases (44, 29, 10, 40, 49, 43): Systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma, connective tissue disease, dermatomyositis
    Acute viral infections, DNA viral infections (59, 48, 43, 53, 40, 13)
    Malignant neoplasms (cancers)(40)
    Alcoholic hepatitis/alcoholic liver disease (32, 48, 40,10,13, 49, 43, 53)
    Primary sclerosing cholangitis (48, 53)
    Hepatitis (54)
    "Sticky" blood (in Africans) (38, 34, 40)
    Antibodies with a high affinity for polystyrene (used in the test kits)(62, 40, 3)
    Blood transfusions, multiple blood transfusions (63, 36,13, 49, 43, 41)
    Multiple myeloma (10, 43, 53)
    HLA antibodies (to Class I and II leukocyte antigens)(7, 46, 63, 48, 10, 13, 49, 43, 53)
    Anti-smooth muscle antibody (48)
    Anti-parietal cell antibody (48)
    Anti-hepatitis A IgM (antibody)(48)
    Anti-Hbc IgM (48)
    Administration of human immunoglobulin preparations pooled before 1985 (10)
    Haemophilia (10, 49)
    Haematologic malignant disorders/lymphoma (43, 53, 9, 48, 13)
    Primary biliary cirrhosis (43, 53, 13, 48)
    Stevens-Johnson syndrome9, (48, 13)
    Q-fever with associated hepatitis (61)
    Heat-treated specimens (51, 57, 24, 49, 48)
    Lipemic serum (blood with high levels of fat or lipids)(49)
    Haemolyzed serum (blood where haemoglobin is separated from the red cells)(49)
    Hyperbilirubinemia (10, 13)
    Globulins produced during polyclonal gammopathies (which are seen in AIDS risk groups)(10, 13, 48)
    Healthy individuals as a result of poorly-understood cross-reactions (10)
    Normal human ribonucleoproteins (48,13)
    Other retroviruses (8, 55, 14, 48, 13)
    Anti-mitochondrial antibodies (48, 13)
    Anti-nuclear antibodies (48, 13, 53)
    Anti-microsomal antibodies (34)
    T-cell leukocyte antigen antibodies (48, 13)
    Proteins on the filter paper (13)
    Epstein-Barr virus (37)
    Visceral leishmaniasis (45)
    Receptive anal sex (39, 64)

References

1. Agbalika F, Ferchal F, Garnier J-P, et al. 1992. False-positive antigens related to emergence of a 25-30 kD protein detected in organ recipients. AIDS. 6:959-962.

2. Andrade V, Avelleira JC, Marques A, et al. 1991. Leprosy as a cause of false-positive results in serological assays for the detection of antibodies to HIV-1. Intl. J. Leprosy. 59:125.

3. Arnold NL, Slade RA, Jones MM, et al. 1994. Donor follow up of influenza vaccine-related multiple viral enzyme immunoassay reactivity. Vox Sanguinis. 67:191.

4. Ascher D, Roberts C. 1993. Determination of the etiology of seroreversals in HIV testing by antibody fingerprinting. AIDS. 6:241.

5. Barbacid M, Bolgnesi D, Aaronson S. 1980. Humans have antibodies capable of recognizing oncoviral glycoproteins: Demonstration that these antibodies are formed in response to cellular modification of glycoproteins rather than as consequence of exposure to virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 77:1617-1621.

6. Biggar R, Melbye M, Sarin P, et al. 1985. ELISA HTLV retrovirus antibody reactivity associated with malaria and immune complexes in healthy Africans. Lancet. ii:520-543.

7. Blanton M, Balakrishnan K, Dumaswala U, et al. 1987. HLA antibodies in blood donors with reactive screening tests for antibody to the immunodeficiency virus. Transfusion. 27(1):118.

8. Blomberg J, Vincic E, Jonsson C, et al. 1990. Identification of regions of HIV-1 p24 reactive with sera which give "indeterminate" results in electrophoretic immunoblots with the help of long synthetic peptides. AIDS Res. Hum. Retro. 6:1363.

9. Burkhardt U, Mertens T, Eggers H. 1987. Comparison of two commercially available anti-HIV ELISA's: Abbott HTLV-III ELA and DuPont HTLV-III ELISA. J. Med. Vir. 23:217.

10. Bylund D, Ziegner U, Hooper D. 1992 Review of testing for human immunodeficiency virus. Clin. Lab. Med. 12:305-333.

11. Challakere K, Rapaport M. 1993. False-positive human immunodeficiency virus type 1 ELISA results in low-risk subjects. West. J. Med. 159(2):214-215.

12. Charmot G, Simon F. 1990. HIV infection and malaria. Revue du practicien. 40:2141.

13. Cordes R, Ryan M. 1995. Pitfalls in HIV testing. Postgraduate Medicine. 98:177.

14. Dock N, Lamberson H, O'Brien T, et al. 1988. Evaluation of atypical human immunodeficiency virus immunoblot reactivity in blood donors. Transfusion. 28:142.

15. Esteva M, Blasini A, Ogly D, et al. 1992. False positive results for antibody to HIV in two men with systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 51:1071-1073.

16. Fassbinder W, Kuhni P, Neumayer H. et al. 1986. Prevalence of antibodies against LAV/HTLV-III [HIV] in patients with terminal renal insufficiency treated with hemodialysis and following renal transplantation. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift. 111:1087.

17. Fleming D, Cochi S, Steece R. et al. 1987. Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in low-incidence areas. JAMA. 258(6):785.

18. Gill MJ, Rachlis A, Anand C. 1991. Five cases of erroneously diagnosed HIV infection. Can. Med. Asso. J. 145(12):1593.

19. Healey D, Bolton W. 1993. Apparent HIV-1 glycoprotein reactivity on Western blot in uninfected blood donors. AIDS. 7:655-658.

20. Hisa J. 1993. False-positive ELISA for human immunodeficiency virus after influenza vaccination. JID. 167:989.

21. Isaacman S. 1989. Positive HIV antibody test results after treatment with hepatitis B immune globulin. JAMA. 262:209.

22. Jackson G, Rubenis M, Knigge M, et al. 1988. Passive immunoneutralisation of human immunodeficiency virus in patients with advanced AIDS. Lancet, Sept. 17:647.

23. Jindal R, Solomon M, Burrows L. 1993. False positive tests for HIV in a woman with lupus and renal failure. NEJM. 328:1281-1282.

24. Jungkind D, DiRenzo S, Young S. 1986. Effect of using heat-inactivated serum with the Abbott human T-cell lymphotropic virus type III [HIV] antibody test. J. Clin. Micro. 23:381.

25. Kashala O, Marlink R, Ilunga M. et al. 1994. Infection with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) and human T-cell lymphotropic viruses among leprosy patients and contacts: correlation between HIV-1 cross-reactivity and antibodies to lipoarabionomanna. J. Infect. Dis. 169:296-304.

26. Lai-Goldman M, McBride J, Howanitz P, et al. 1987. Presence of HTLV-III [HIV] antibodies in immune serum globulin preparations. Am. J. Clin. Path. 87:635.

27. Langedijk J, Vos W, Doornum G, et al. 1992. Identification of cross-reactive epitopes recognized by HIV-1 false-positive sera. AIDS. 6:1547-1548.

28. Lee D, Eby W, Molinaro G. 1992. HIV false positivity after hepatitis B vaccination. Lancet. 339:1060.

29. Leo-Amador G, Ramirez-Rodriguez J, Galvan-Villegas F, et al. 1990. Antibodies against human immunodeficiency virus in generalized lupus erythematosus. Salud Publica de Mexico. 32:15.

30. Mackenzie W, Davis J, Peterson D. et al. 1992. Multiple false-positive serologic tests for HIV, HTLV-1 and hepatitis C following influenza vaccination, 1991. JAMA. 268:1015-1017.

31. Mathe G. 1992. Is the AIDS virus responsible for the disease? Biomed & Pharmacother. 46:1-2.

32. Mendenhall C, Roselle G, Grossman C, et al. 1986. False-positive tests for HTLV-III [HIV] antibodies in alcoholic patients with hepatitis. NEJM. 314:921.

33. Moore J, Cone E, Alexander S. 1986. HTLV-III [HIV] seropositivity in 1971-1972 parenteral drug abusers - a case of false-positives or evidence of viral exposure? NEJM. 314:1387-1388.

34. Mortimer P, Mortimer J, Parry J. 1985. Which anti-HTLV-III/LAV [HIV] assays for screening and comfirmatory testing? Lancet. Oct. 19, p873.

35. Neale T, Dagger J, Fong R, et al. 1985. False-positive anti-HTLV-III [HIV] serology. New Zealand Med. J. October 23.

36. Ng V. 1991. Serological diagnosis with recombinant peptides/proteins. Clin. Chem. 37:1667-1668.

37. Ozanne G, Fauvel M. 1988. Perfomance and reliability of five commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kits in screening for anti-human immunodeficiency virus antibody in high-risk subjects. J. Clin. Micro. 26:1496.

38. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E. 1988. Reappraisal of AIDS - Is the oxidation induced by the risk factors the primary cause? Med. Hypo. 25:151.

39. Papadopulos-Eleopulos E, Turner V, and Papadimitriou J. 1993. Is a positive Western blot proof of HIV infection? Bio/Technology. June 11:696-707.

40. Pearlman ES, Ballas SK. 1994. False-positive human immunodeficiency virus screening test related to rabies vaccination. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 118-805.

41. Peternan T, Lang G, Mikos N, et al. Hemodialysis/renal failure. 1986. JAMA. 255:2324.

42. Piszkewicz D. 1987. HTLV-III [HIV] antibodies after immune globulin. JAMA. 257:316.

43. Profitt MR, Yen-Lieberman B. 1993. Laboratory diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Inf. Dis. Clin. North Am. 7:203.

44. Ranki A, Kurki P, Reipponen S, et al. 1992. Antibodies to retroviral proteins in autoimmune connective tissue disease. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 35:1483.

45. Ribeiro T, Brites C, Moreira E, et al. 1993. Serologic validation of HIV infection in a tropical area. JAIDS. 6:319.

46. Sayers M, Beatty P, Hansen J. 1986. HLA antibodies as a cause of false-positive reactions in screening enzyme immunoassays for antibodies to human T-lymphotropic virus type III [HIV]. Transfusion. 26(1):114.

47. Sayre KR, Dodd RY, Tegtmeier G, et al. 1996. False-positive human immunodeficiency virus type 1 Western blot tests in non-infected blood donors. Transfusion. 36:45.

48. Schleupner CJ. Detection of HIV-1 infection. In: (Mandell GI, Douglas RG, Bennett JE, eds.) Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases, 3rd ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1990:1092.

49. Schochetman G, George J. 1992. Serologic tests for the detection of human immunodeficiency virus infection. In AIDS Testing Methodology and Management Issues, Springer-Verlag, New York.

50. Simonsen L, Buffington J, Shapiro C, et al. 1995. Multiple false reactions in viral antibody screening assays after influenza vaccination. Am. J. Epidem. 141-1089.

51. Smith D, Dewhurst S, Shepherd S, et al. 1987. False-positive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay reactions for antibody to human immunodeficiency virus in a population of midwestern patients with congenital bleeding disorders. Transfusion. 127:112.

52. Snyder H, Fleissner E. 1980. Specificity of human antibodies to oncovirus glycoproteins; Recognition of antigen by natural antibodies directed against carbohydrate structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 77:1622-1626.

53. Steckelberg JM, Cockerill F. 1988. Serologic testing for human immunodeficiency virus antibodies. Mayo Clin. Proc. 63:373.

54. Sungar C, Akpolat T, Ozkuyumcu C, et al. Alpha interferon therapy in hemodialysis patients. Nephron. 67:251.

55. Tribe D, Reed D, Lindell P, et al. 1988. Antibodies reactive with human immunodeficiency virus gag-coated antigens (gag reactive only) are a major cause of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay reactivity in a bood donor population. J. Clin. Micro. April:641.

56. Ujhelyi E, Fust G, Illei G, et al. 1989. Different types of false positive anti-HIV reactions in patients on hemodialysis. Immun. Let. 22:35-40.

57. Van Beers D, Duys M, Maes M, et al. Heat inactivation of serum may interfere with tests for antibodies to LAV/HTLV-III [HIV]. J. Vir. Meth. 12:329.

58. Voevodin A. 1992. HIV screening in Russia. Lancet. 339:1548.

59. Weber B, Moshtaghi-Borojeni M, Brunner M, et al. 1995. Evaluation of the reliability of six current anti-HIV-1/HIV-2 enzyme immunoassays. J. Vir. Meth. 55:97.

60. Wood C, Williams A, McNamara J, et al. 1986. Antibody against the human immunodeficiency virus in commercial intravenous gammaglobulin preparations. Ann. Int. Med. 105:536.

61. Yale S, Degroen P, Tooson J, et al. 1994. Unusual aspects of acute Q fever-associated hepatitis. Mayo Clin. Proc. 69:769.

62. Yoshida T, Matsui T, Kobayashi M, et al. 1987. Evaluation of passive particle agglutination test for antibody to human immunodeficiency virus. J. Clin. Micro. Aug:1433.

63. Yu S, Fong C, Landry M, et al. 1989. A false positive HIV antibody reaction due to transfusion-induced HLA-DR4 sensitization. NEJM.320:1495.

64. National Institue of Justice, AIDS Bulletin. Oct. 1988.

[Satyagraha]

HIV=AIDS: Fact or Fraud?

One of the most powerful video documentaries of our time boldly reveals the modern medical-industrial complex's dire descent into utter corruption. This feature-length expose explains exactly how the 300-Billion-dollar AID$ fraud began, why HIV can NOT be the cause of AIDS, what the real causes could be, and who manipulates the public's good intentions while poisoning hundreds of thousands with toxic drugs that cause the very disease they are supposed to prevent. This is a systematic dissection of the HIV/AID$ machine and how they hijacked a program designed to fight a worldwide plight of human suffering and drove it down the road to hell. Yet this program offers hope, inspired by the courage and articulate arguments of a group of growing voices internationally challenging the HIV=AIDS=DEATH hysteria. A MUST SEE for anyone interested in truly understanding the facts about HIV/AID$.

AIDS=HIV Fact or Fraud? (13 parts)
http://www.youtube.com/user/AidsHoax

The bottom line is MONEY. There's lots of money poured into researching HIV as the cause of AIDS, and it has never been proven; in (according to the video) 100,000+ scientific studies, NOT ONE has confirmed that HIV causes AIDS.

In the 5th part of that video, at appx. the 1.15 minute mark, these points are made:
http://www.youtube.com/user/AidsHoax#p/a/u/5/dPx-M6_DUDE





After 10 years since the first cases were discovered, 97% of the groups affected by AIDS remained the same. I would expect that hasn't changed in the years since that video was made. This calls into question the argument that AIDS is caused by the HIV virus; or any virus; given the fact that diseases contracted from viruses SPREAD outside the initial population that gets infected. This virus has not been acting like any other virus known to man. Also, although HIV is found in 50/50 distribution between men and women, AIDS is found in a population where 90% are men.



Enough evidence is presented to show that the 'accepted' science behind the causes of AIDS is more than questionable; like the science behind 'anthropomorphic global warming' - the political agenda is supplanting scientific integrity.

[Ponzi Nemesis]

"House of Numbers" can now be found on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p-ttLfkZHQ

Here's the sequel, "The Emperors New Virus? - An Analysis of the Evidence for the Existence of HIV":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQFxratWh7E

If you only have 15 minutes to spare this is a good intro in which scientists and journalists discuss their skepticism over Gallo's sex virus of mass destruction theory:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL3cAS3YUKM

[thefridayknight]

Will certainly watch it. thanks.