Rethinking AIDS Conference
Oakland, California
7 November 2009
History of the Controversy
John Lauritsen
Almost three decades ago, in 1981, a young man developed severe lung disease, which was diagnosed as Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP), then falsely believed to be a rare disease caused by a protozoan. He was declared to be an “active homosexual”, who had been “previously healthy”. Four more young gay men with PCP were found. Shortly after this a couple of dozen men, also “active homosexuals”, were diagnosed as having Kaposi's sarcoma (KS), which was then falsely believed to be a rare form of cancer. Public health workers and physicians assumed that these few cases must have a connection, and strained mightily to find one. From their speculations “AIDS” emerged — a protean construct, rather than a coherent disease entity — a powerful and ever-evolving myth.
Dubious tests and bizarre speculations were accepted uncritically until 1983, when a few voices of dissent were heard. In a few years there would be hundreds, and then thousands of us.
A lot of water has gone under the bridge. In 1993 Scarecrow Press published The AIDS Dissidents: An Annotated Bibliography, by Ian Young. This was followed by a supplement, The AIDS Dissidents: 1993-2000 (TMW Communications). These contain many hundreds of items. With limited time, I can only mention a few of the people, articles, books, videos, organizations, etc. — and I'll have to do so in broad strokes.
The basic AIDS-concept, prior to 1984, was that something caused a condition of “immune deficiency”, which in turn caused PCP, KS, and various other “AIDS-indicator diseases”. But here “immune deficiency” was defined in a way that was new and unprecedented: by counting CD4+ T lymphocytes, by computing T4/T8 ratios. By a miraculous coincidence, the technology for counting T-cells had been perfected just before the emergence of “AIDS” (which the world had allegedly never seen before). Later on, CD4 counts, rather than the health of the patient, would be the basis for evaluating the efficacy of AIDS drugs. Although it has been known since at least 1993 that the CD4 test is worthless, this worthless test is still being used to evaluate the efficacy of toxic and worthless AIDS drugs.
It was all nonsense. The AIDS net was cast wider, to include heroin users with lung disease. They were sick and dying in exactly the same ways that heroin users had been sick and dying for a hundred years — yet the CDC said they had become sick from sharing needles, and encouraged them to continue shooting up, with clean needles. Never had the simple research been done, to determine whether or not these heroin users ever had shared needles. So far as Kaposi's sarcoma is concerned, Public Health Service officials finally admitted in 1994 that this affliction of the blood vessels is not caused by HIV; it has nothing to do with so-called immune deficiency, and if anything is associated with an overactive immune system.
The very earliest attempts by the CDC to formulate a surveillance definition for “AIDS” involved a process of elimination. If a “previously healthy” patient developed an AIDS-defining illness, as well as low CD4 counts, and there was no known cause of the “immune deficiency”, then he had “AIDS”. There are multiple fallacies involved here. For one thing, the early AIDS cases were by no means “previously healthy”. Secondly, all of the early cases had multiple and severe health risks in their lives. Thirdly, there are innumerable ways to become seriously sick (or “immune deficient”).
In 1983 I began studying the medical literature on “AIDS”, which then was less than two dozen articles. In those early years various hypotheses were advanced as to the nature and causes of AIDS. Toxicology was not excluded. All this changed in 1984, when the U.S. Secretary of Health announced at a press conference that the “probable cause of AIDS” had been found: HTLV-III (“Human T-cell lymphotropic virus type III”, later re-named as “Human immunodeficiency virus” or HIV). Though there was no evidence for the AIDS-virus hypothesis then, and there is none now, it became instant dogma. From 1984 on, AIDS could only be discussed in an “AIDS virus” context.
I'll now give a very brief chronological history of AIDS-criticism.
An early AIDS critic was Joseph Sonnabend, a New York City physician with a practice consisting mostly of gay men. Sonnabend put forward a multifactorial model: AIDS was caused by multiple infections with known viruses, together with immune-suppressing effects of semen.
Another early AIDS critic, Nathaniel Lehrman, once commented to me: “Multifactorial is multifactorial nothing.” Be that as it may, Sonnabend's multifactorial model was incomplete, in that it disregarded drugs, antibiotics, and psychological factors. Sonnabend pooh-poohed the effects of “poppers” (nitrite inhalants), the premier gay drug, and he believed that some people could use heroin in moderation, without ill effects. Once when I told Sonnabend that some of his “AIDS” patients with PCP continued to be chain smokers, he looked at me almost contemptuously and said: “If you knew that someone had only a few months to live, would you really deny them something that gave them pleasure?” Sonnabend has since recanted his earlier heresies; he now attacks “AIDS denialists”, and has prescribed antivirals to his patients.
My own take on the multifactorial issue: “AIDS” is not a coherent disease entity, but a phoney construct. In reality, different individuals and different groups are getting sick in different ways and for different reasons.
In 1983 I began collaborating with Hank Wilson in San Francisco, to warn gay men about the dangers of using poppers. We wrote articles for the gay press and published a pamphlet, “Poppers & AIDS”.
In 1984 a New York psychiatrist, Casper Schmidt, wrote an article, “The Group-Fantasy Origins of AIDS”, which was published in the Journal of Psychohistory, Summer 1984. Schmidt stated that there are “two main classes of contagious illness in man: infectious diseases (spread by germs) and contagious forms of psychological disturbances (spread by suggestion).” He rejected the former, because “AIDS”, unlike an epidemic of infection, was following cultural fault lines. Whether or not one completely goes along with Schmidt's hypothesis, that AIDS is an example of epidemic hysteria, the paper strongly makes the point that in the decade preceding the first cases, intense psychological warfare had been waged against gay men by religious fundamentalists. When gay men, from their earliest sexual awaking, are told that they ought to die, this must have an impact on their health — and perhaps the true origin of “AIDS” lies two and a half millennia ago, in the Holiness Code of Leviticus 18:22, which says that if two males have sex with each other, they have committed an abomination and should be put to death. For decades, and even now, gay men in novels or Hollywood movies must either be murdered or commit suicide.
Also in 1984, my first writing on “AIDS” appeared: a letter to a gay paper, the New York City News. I criticized the CDC's AIDS statistics, which greatly understated the role of drugs.
In February 1985 my first major AIDS article, “CDC's Tables Obscure AIDS-Drugs Connection”, was published in the Philadelphia Gay News. It began:
In 1982 it became apparent that the proportions of each of the AIDS risk groups were remaining more or less constant. Month after month gay/bisexual men continued to account for just under three quarters of the cases.
If AIDS were simply a new, unusually virulent, communicable disease, it should have begun to fan out into the general population. But this has not happened.
From then to the present I have brooded over whether the statisticians at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and other branches of the Public Health Service (PHS) are incompetent or dishonest, and have concluded: both! They are ignorant of the simplest statistical conventions. (For statisticians: One branch of the Public Health Service issued a report with chi-square tests, in which all of their “p” values were off by three orders of magnitude — that is to say, they thought their results were a thousand times more significant than they really were.) A friendly PHS officer told me they couldn't attract more competent statisticians, because they weren't paid enough. The New York City Health Department issued tables with glaring mistakes in ordinary arithmetic. When I pointed this out to Polly Thomas, head of the department, they solved the problem — by purchasing tens of thousands of dollars worth of new computer hardware and software.
Also in 1985 two AIDS articles of mine were published in the New York Native, which in the next eleven years would publish over fifty of my articles. The Native was then the foremost gay publication, sold on newsstands all over the world.
Finally, in 1985 Ben Gardiner in San Francisco started the AIDS Information Bulletin Board, which from the beginning carried information representing all viewpoints. The AIDS Info BBS evolved into a web site, and is still running.
In 1986 Nathaniel S. Lehrman's article, “A ‘Natural’ Epidemic?”, was published in the New Amsterdam News, 18 January 1986, and later reprinted in the New York Native. Lehrman argued that HIV failed Koch's Postulates, and that toxicological causes for “AIDS” should be investigated.
1986 also saw the publication of Marc Lappé's book, When Antibiotics Fail — relevant, since some of the early gay male AIDS cases had been treated with antibiotics dozens of times in a single decade, and had taken them prophylactically before having sex.
Finally, in 1986: a small book, Death Rush: Poppers & AIDS, by Hank Wilson and myself. This book used Koch's Postulates and Occam's Razor to argue against a viral etiology (HIV had not yet been named), and put forward a multifactorial model that emphasized toxins.
1987 was a momentous year, Peter Duesberg's article, “Retroviruses as Carcinogens and Pathogens: Expectations and Reality”, was published in Cancer Research, March 1987, stating that it was not in the nature of retroviruses to cause cancer or any other kind of illness. In the same month my severely critical review of the book, Confronting AIDS, — produced by the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences — appeared in the New York Native. I interviewed Duesberg in June, and the controversy burst into the public arena. A month later Celia Farber wrote her first AIDS article, also an interview with Duesberg, for SPIN, a magazine about rock music. My first articles on the pharmaceutical poison, AZT, were published in the Native, the most important being, “AZT On Trial”, in which, using documents released under the Freedom of Information Act, I charged that the Phase II AZT trials — on the basis of which the drug was approved for marketing — were manifestly fraudulent. Gary Null began having AIDS critics like Duesberg and me on his radio talk show on WBAI in New York City.
On 8 September 1987, “AIDS: The Unheard Voices” — the first of many AIDS-critical documentaries produced by Joan Shenton and her company, Meditel — was broadcast over Channel 4 television in the United Kingdom. This documentary won a Royal Television Society journalism award, equivalent to the Pulitzer Prize in the United States.
And still in 1987, several books were published, which departed from the orthodox AIDS paradigm. Lawrence Badgley's Healing AIDS Naturally: Natural Therapies for the Immune System. Nick Bamforth's AIDS and the Healer Within. The first volume of Michael Callen's Surviving and Thriving with AIDS: Hints for the Newly Diagnosed. Perhaps most provocative was a booklet by William R. and Claudia Holub, Healing “AIDS” — Sex and Germs, which maintained that “AIDS” is simply a new name for old diseases.
By 1988 the AIDS Establishment felt obliged to confront Duesberg, and did so in a forum sponsored by the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR), held in Washington DC on 9 April 1988. Facing Anthony Fauci, Robert Gallo, and a truculent William Haseltine, Duesberg was expected to recant — but he stood his ground, and was supported by Harry Rubin, one of the pioneers of retrovirology. The Native published my report under the title, “Kangaroo Court Etiology: AmFAR holds a forum to discredit Duesberg, but winds up confirming shabbiness of ‘proof’ of HIV as sole cause of AIDS” (9 May 1988).
Early in 1988 Anthony Liversidge conducted a telephone interview with Robert Gallo, America's premier “AIDS expert” (SPIN February 1988). Gallo ranted, raved, and swore, but failed to rebut Duesberg's criticisms of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis. Within a few years Gallo would be found guilty of “scientific misconduct”, and two of his closest associates would be convicted of felonies.
Later in 1988 Peter Duesberg had a brief article, “HIV Is Not The Cause Of AIDS”, published in Science (29 July 1988), arguing against two supporters of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis.
Also in 1988, the first AIDS-critical article by Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos — a member of the Perth Group, which also includes Valendar F. Turner and John M. Papadimitriou — was published in Medical Hypotheses, “Reappraisal of AIDS: Is the Oxidation Induced by the Risk Factors the Primary Cause?”
Several non-orthodox books were published in 1988, the most important being Jon Rappoport's hard-hitting AIDS Inc.: Scandal of the Century and the second volume of Michael Callen's Surviving and Thriving with AIDS.
And on 16 December 1988, the first AIDS-dissident conference, organized by mathematics professor Frank Buianouckas, was held in New York City at Bronx Community College.
In 1989, in addition to many AIDS dissident articles, several books were published, most notably Jad Adams's AIDS: The HIV Myth and Richard C. and Rosalind J. Chirimuuta's AIDS, Africa and Racism.
In Los Angeles in February 1989, Lawrence Badgley sponsored an alternative health symposium, at which I, William Holub and several other AIDS-dissidents spoke.
In 1990 the entire 115-page issue of a German magazine, Raum & Zeit — under the title: “'AIDS': Die Krankheit die es gar nicht gibt” (“AIDS”: the disease that doesn't even exist) — was devoted to German, Swiss and American AIDS-critics, who attacked the AIDS orthodoxies with intelligence and militancy. My favorite phrase: “Nur tote Fische schwimmen mit dem Strom.” (Only dead fish swim with the stream.).
An important article by Peter H. Duesberg and Bryan J. Ellison, “Is the AIDS Virus a Science Fiction?”, appeared in the Summer 1990 issue of the conservative magazine, Policy Review.
Among the critical AIDS books published in 1990 were Michael Callen's Surviving AIDS, Michael Fumento's The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, and my own Poison By Prescription: The AZT Story.
On 13 June 1990 Meditel's second major AIDS documentary, “The AIDS Catch”, aired over Channel 4 television. It had a point-of-view. The narrator, Michael Verney-Elliott, superbly enunciated such points as: “AIDS was not behaving like an infectious disease.”
In Berlin Kawi Schneider and Peter Schmidt began showing the Meditel documentaries and their own programs over the Offenen Kanal television.
The year 1992 was notable for several things. A major conference, “AIDS: A Different View”, took place in Amsterdam, 14-16 May. The conference was sponsored by the Dutch government, which insisted that it include defenders of AIDS orthodoxy. Some of these behaved boorishly, but we AIDS critics succeeded in getting our ideas across.
Just before the conference, the Sunday Times (London), under a banner headline, published a two-and-a-half page article by Neville Hodgkinson, “Experts mount startling challenge to Aids orthodoxy”.
After battling with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for several months, I finally obtained documents under the Freedom of Information Act, which documented in stark detail the cheating that took place in the Phase II AZT trials — cheating which was uncovered by an FDA investigative team. My article, “FDA Documents Show Fraud in AZT Trials”, appeared in the New York Native, 30 March 1992.
Early in 1992 Meditel's third AIDS documentary, “AZT: Cause For Concern”, aired over Channel 4 television. The next day thousands of “AIDS” patients flushed their AZT capsules down the toilet. Shares of Wellcome Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of AZT, plunged, and the charitable Wellcome Foundation divested itself of Wellcome stocks. Wellcome retaliated, not by answering any of the arguments made in the film, and not by suing for libel, but by surreptitiously attacking our reputations and livelihoods.
AIDS critics from all over the world flew to Berlin for the June 1993 International AIDS Conference.. Many of us met for the first time at the home of Kawi Schneider, who hosted us in the evenings. Those of us who were professional journalists asked embarrassing questions during the press conferences. Demonstrators with signs like “AZT is poison” and “HIV is good for you” were outside the convention hall. Robert Laarhoven set up a literature table on the “bridge” between the main conference area and the exhibition area. For the most part, the many dozens of delegates who came up to the table were friendly and keenly interested in our ideas. The next day the AIDS Empire struck back. Robert Laarhoven's press pass was confiscated, and he was threatened with deportation for having committed “criminal trespass”. Peter Schmidt and Christian Joswig, who were handing out leaflets in front of the convention center, were violently attacked by several dozen members of Act Up, who destroyed signs, burned leaflets, and attempted to destroy camera equipment. (The Act Up members were staying in luxurious hotels with swimming pools, all expenses paid by Wellcome Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of AZT.) Later in the day Act Up goons destroyed the booth of a Swiss AIDS Group, which had expressed skepticism regarding the use of condoms. Media people who witnessed these crimes reported nothing, and the conference organizers took no action against the perpetrators.
Following the International AIDS conference in Berlin, an “AZT On Trial” conference, chaired by Martin Walker, was held in London.
In June 1993 the Perth Group's most influential article, “Is A Western Blot Proof Of HIV Infection?”, was published in Bio/Technology. This argued that the “HIV-antibody” tests, although used to diagnose HIV infection, had never been validated according to the only meaningful standard, the actual isolation of the virus itself.
Christine Johnson popularized and expanded upon the Perth Group's article, showing, in several articles, that many dozens of conditions (flu vaccination, past malaria infection, drug abuse, pregnancy, etc.) can cause positive readings on the alleged “HIV-antibody” tests.
During 1993 the Sunday Times and Neville Hodgkinson were subjected to one vicious attack after another, from AIDS activists, medical people, and egregiously from Nature magazine. They responded with a page-wide banner headline: “AIDS: Why We Won't Be Silenced”.
A number of AIDS-dissident books were published in 1993: Martin J. Walker's Dirty Medicine, Ian Young's The AIDS Dissidents: An Annotated Bibliography, my own The AIDS War: Propaganda, Profiteering and Genocide from the Medical-Industrial Complex, and Robert Root-Bernstein's Rethinking AIDS: The Tragic Cost of Premature Consensus. Root-Bernstein's book was unsatisfactory in many ways; he attempted to straddle the fence, and is now in the camp of AIDS orthodoxy, claiming that HIV is a necessary cause of “AIDS”.
The fourth important Meditel documentary, “AIDS and Africa”, aired in 1993.
In 1994 the rank of AIDS-dissidents was joined by Kary Mullis, who had just won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for inventing the Polymerase Chain Reaction. Together with Charles A. Thomas, Jr. and Phillip E. Johnson, he co-authored an article, “What Causes AIDS?”, which was published in the libertarian magazine, Reason.
On 21 June 1994, here in San Francisco, there was an all-day symposium sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). The AIDS-critics were Phillip Johnson, Harvey Bialy, Celia Farber, Charles Thomas, Peter Duesberg, Peter Plumly, Kary Mullis, Harry Rubin, Bryan Ellison, and Charles Geschekter. The speakers who attempted to defend AIDS orthodoxy were badly trounced, and the symposium ended on a note of jubilation for our side.
In May 1994 an alternative AIDS conference was held in Bologna, Italy.
A two-part article by the prominent mathematician, Serge Lang, “HIV and AIDS: Questions of Scientific and Journalistic Responsibility”, was published in Yale Scientific, starting in Fall 1994.
In 1994 Bryan Ellison self-published a book written by himself and Peter Duesberg: Why We Will Never Win The War On AIDS. Since this publication was done without Duesberg's consent, it was later withdrawn.
In 1995 a young German virologist, Stefan Lanka, argued that, not only has HIV never been properly isolated, but it might not even exist (“HIV: Reality or Artefact”, Continuum, April/May 1995). Later Lanka would argue that retroviruses themselves might not exist, but rather be proteins shed by human cells under stress. This provoked a dispute among AIDS dissidents, which is still going on. One side (Duesberg et al.) claims that HIV is a harmless passenger retrovirus. The other side (Lanka, the Perth Group) claims that HIV does not exist. However, both sides agree that a true viral infection (viremia) has never been demonstrated — that HIV, after standard purification procedures, has never been photographed using the electron microscope, and therefore may not exist as an intact, cell-free, infectious virus.
The Perth Group's paper, “Factor VIII, HIV and AIDS”, effectively demolished the notion that hemophiliacs with “AIDS” had been infected with HIV in Factor VIII concentrate. In fact, HIV has never been detected in Factor VIII concentrate.
Ian Young's book, The Stonewall Experiment, was published in 1995. It debunked the orthodox view of “AIDS” and movingly portrayed the betrayal of gay liberation ideals by the commercial sex industry and by hateful religionists.
In April 1995, an alternative AIDS conference was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, organized by Ricardo Leschot.
In 1996 David Rasnick, an expert on protease inhibitors, wrote “Inhibitors of HIV Protease Useless Against AIDS” (Reappraising AIDS, August 1996). Paul Philpott & Christine Johnson debunked the use of Polymerase Chain Reaction to count HIV in their article, “Viral Load of Crap” (Rethinking AIDS, October 1996). Their critique was supported by Kary Mullis, who stated: “Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.” — that is to say, the “viral load” tests, which are alleged to yield HIV counts, are an absurdity and contradiction in terms. PCR is intended to amplify genetic sequences, but not to quantify anything. PCR is not even able to identify cell-free viruses, let alone count them.
In 1996 a new AIDS-dissident militancy emerged with San Francisco Act Up — which, unlike the other Act Ups, was opposed to the AIDS Industry and its lies. At the International AIDS Conference in Vancouver, hundreds of angry AIDS activists, led by Act Up San Francisco, marched to the opening ceremony of the conference, behind a banner that read: “AIDS Drugs Kill. Ban Toxic AZT. Sue Glaxo!” Later at the conference, members of SF Act Up crashed an AZT panel, and drenched Margaret Fischl and Paul Volberding with fake blood, charging them with murder for promoting a poison, which had been approved on the basis of fraudulent research.
The leader of SF Act Up, David Pasquarelli, paid with his life for this militancy. Five years later he was imprisoned on trumped-up charges of “terrorism”. He was treated harshly; his health was destroyed, and he died two years later. [1] I was very fond of David, and can hardly believe that I am in San Francisco now and won't see him.
1996 saw the publication of three important books: Peter Duesberg's Inventing The AIDS Virus, Steven Epstein's Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge, and Neville Hodgkinson's AIDS, The Failure of Contemporary Science: How a Virus That Never Was Deceived the World. Hodgkinson's fine book was withdrawn and destroyed by the publisher, and copies are hard to find — but he will soon be making it available electronically.
In 1997 Ian Young and I edited The AIDS Cult: Essays on the Gay Health Crisis. The eight contributors — Casper Schmidt, George Hazlehurst, Michael Ellner, Andrew Cort, Cass Mann, Michael Callen, John Lauritsen and Ian Young — explored the psycho-social background to “AIDS”, the ways that beliefs, group interests and social forces conspire to make gay men sick.
In 1998 Joan Shenton told the Meditel story, and gave an excellent summary of AIDS controversies, in her book, Positively False: Exposing the Myths Around HIV and AIDS.
The 1998 International AIDS Conference was held in Geneva, and for the first time AIDS critics were on the official program, thanks to the organizing of Michael Baumgartner. About 60 dissidents were present, and about 18 of us were inside with press passes. In the panel on testing, the Perth Group debunked the “HIV-antibody” tests, and Etienne de Harven showed how retroviruses properly ought to be isolated and photographed. An alternative conference was held near the conference site. A panel on side effects of the protease inhibitors was well attended; it showed gruesome slides of “Crix bellies” and “buffalo humps”.
In 1999 Christine Maggiore wrote a large pamphlet, “What If Everything You Thought You Knew About AIDS Was Wrong?”. In time this would be expanded and become the most popular of our alternative AIDS publications. She founded the group, Alive and Well, which — together with the proliferating HEAL groups — would provide hope and sound advice to those who had been given “HIV-positive” diagnoses.
In 2004 Charles Ortleb (publisher of the New York Native) made a film, “The Last Lovers On Earth”, based on his 1999 book by the same title. This brilliant satirical film was released in DVD form in 2006, and is currently available.
Also in 2006: Celia Farber's book, Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS.
In 2007 two important books were published: Henry H. Bauer's The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory and Rebecca Culshaw's Science Sold Out: Does HIV really cause AIDS?
Of great importance in the struggle for Truth about “AIDS” are the web sites, which have provided an end run around censorship. Some of the main ones, in no particular order: Virus Myth, Duesberg, AIDS Wiki, Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society, Sumeria (Memory Hole), AIDS Information BBS, Perth Group, James Hogan, Anthony Brink, Rethinking AIDS, Alive and Well, Roberto Giraldo, HEAL (especially Toronto, New York and London), Henry Bauer, David Rasnick, Lew Rockwell, and the Immunity Resource Foundation.
Publications that were at least sometimes friendly to our ideas include: Continuum, Rethinking AIDS, Reappraising AIDS, New York Native, SPIN, HEAL Bulletin, Raum & Zeit, Bio/Technology, Zenger's, Gay & Lesbian Humanist, Positively Healthy, PWA Coalition Newsletter, Townsend Letter for Physicians, Magnus, and Genetica.
Finally, the alternative AIDS groups, and I'm afraid this list will be very incomplete: The Group (for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis) formed in 1991. HEAL (New York and then many other cities). Act Up San Francisco. Positively Healthy. Alive & Well. Continuum. Project AIDS International. Cure Now (Los Angeles). PWA Coalition (sometimes friendly to dissidents). Alternative Health. Foundation for Research Of Natural Therapies (F.R.O.N.T.). Praxis.
CONCLUSIONS
Science is cumulative. As the dissenting discourse on “AIDS” moves into increasingly specialized and rarified areas, it is important that we do not forget what we already know.
“AIDS” is not a coherent disease entity. It has never been defined rationally, and the surveillance definition has changed radically over time.
Whatever “AIDS” is, it is not infectious.
The Phase II AZT trials, on the basis of which AZT was approved for marketing in 1987, were fraudulent. All the subsequent “AIDS” drugs rode in on the coattails of AZT.
All of the “AIDS” tests are worthless: Elisa, Western Blot, CD4 counts, P24 antigen, and PCR counts.
We are not dealing with honorable opponents. They lie, cheat and steal, and — oh, yes — they murder. (They are currently smearing us with the label “AIDS denialists”, and saying that we are responsible for the deaths of 330,000 Africans — because we prevented them from getting the AZT they needed!)
People with HIV+ diagnoses can thrive, provided they learn the truth about “AIDS”, follow good health practices, and keep drugs out of their bodies.
NOTE:
1. For David Pasquarelli's account of his experience in prison click here.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario