Apparently, HIV Doesn't Cause AIDS

Wow! Sa_fartman cuts and pastes from the government. We know the government lies to us when it's convenient. I don't know if Mr. Bill is accurate or not, but I know the government will lie to me. I'd rather see evidence from a source that isn't known for lying when it suits it's purpose.

Wow! Sa_fartman cuts and pastes from the government. We know the government lies to us when it's convenient. I don't know if Mr. Bill is accurate or not, but I know the government will lie to me. I'd rather see evidence from a source that isn't known for lying when it suits it's purpose. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Oh yeah, AIDs is reaallll convenient for the gov't. All those researchers, some I know, putting in countless hours for the 'cure' and they just looove to lie. What an asshole cog.

You know, Sa_fartman, the fascists love citizens who refuse to question the government. You will do well.

You know, Sa_fartman, the fascists love citizens who refuse to question the government. You will do well. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Another canned brainless response. I think I read that on a bumper sticker in Iraq. Tell you what senile old guy...get an original thought and opinion that doesn't require you to cut and paste nor involve some fear mongering, then report back.

LOL! You are entertaining. Ignorant, but entertaining.

LOL! You are entertaining. Ignorant, but entertaining.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Same could be said of you...except you're not entertaining as that insinuates some talent. I just feel sorry for you as you'll die ignorant and scared and hating the country that you apparently had to suffer through living in.

I don't hate my country. I hate my government. There is a difference. I will ask another question, which you will ridicule rather than answer, what is there to love about the American government?

I don't hate my country. I hate my government. That in a nutshell says a lot. What a hypocrite.
what is there to love about the American government?Alot. It's the greatest creation of the founding fathers. Sure it has a life of it's own and like most things needs work, but to say you 'hate' it? That's some Timothy McVeigh type shit or the Unabomber. You do fucking scare me because idiots like you like to blow up shit. I bet you clapped at 9/11

HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS
A Summary of Current Research Findings

by James DeMeo, Ph.D.


Michael Fumento Fumento's book, The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, summarized evidence gathered by various scientists to the affect that there never was, nor is, a "Heterosexual AIDS Epidemic" taking place, either in the USA or overseas.

Fumento documented how the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had doctored the epidemiological data, unscientifically "adjusting" it here and there, in order to have it support a previously formulated and "politically correct" conclusion: that everyone, including relatively monogamous heterosexuals, and even non-drug-using heterosexual teenagers, were "at risk for AIDS".

Fumento's criticism of this position was attacked even before the ink was dry, and his book was suppressed and sabotaged both by national book distributors, and by his publisher, who came under attack by homosexual activist groups. Fumento himself lost his job, and was subject to harassment and death threats by these same groups, who -- as demonstrated in his book -- have glaring sex-political agendas and economic motivations.

continued...

.

Sa_fartman, you are an idiot. I have always espoused non-violent civil disobedience. And you scare me, because you refuse to question your government. This is not the country our Founders envisioned. I just want to return to the country they founded. That is not what we are today.

Violence is not the way to induce change. For one thing, that is something that the government is much better at than anyone else. Why play to their strength? Non-violence and reason is not their strong suit, which is where our strength lies.

The Unabomber was motivated by Al Gore. The 9-11 hijackers were motivated by a distortion of Islam. McVeigh was crazy. I have no commonality with them. I am committed to freedom and liberty, and reclaiming the unalienable rights that have been taken from us. The notion of violence is incompatible with the ends I seek.

But go ahead, make up more stuff about me, and then congratulate yourself on your superiority. I expect nothing less.

HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS
A Summary of Current Research Findings

by James DeMeo, Ph.D.


Use of the term "AIDS virus" is completely suspended, as it presumes AIDS is an infectious disorder for which a viral causation has been identified. Neither supposition has been proven; both remain hypotheses.

The diagnostic terminology "AIDS" does not by itself imply causation; it merely indicates severe immunological break-down and deficiency within an individual. We must also be clear about the differences between the virus HIV and the HIV antibody; these are not the same thing. This clarifying discipline in terminology is necessary, precisely because so many television and newspaper journalists, and many scientists and science editors as well, have abandoned rigor in their terminology, critical review, and research.

AIDS remains a problem mainly for individuals engaging in identifiable and preventable high-risk behaviors which, over time, deplete and destroy the immune system. These factors include: promiscuous and unsanitary anal intercourse and anal object-penetration and trauma in association with the party-swinger, bath-house, anonymous-sex lifestyle; the associated or independent chronic use of aphrodisiac sexual stimulants, psychoactive drugs, amphetamines, alcohol, antibiotics and other immune-system depleting substances (legal and illegal); and malnutrition.

To this list must be included also the taking of deadly, poisonous medications, such as AZT -- a DNA chain terminator -- which all by itself will produce the same "wasting" symptoms attributed to AIDS.

continued...

.

HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS
A Summary of Current Research Findings

by James DeMeo, Ph.D.


The Virus HIV

The claim that the virus HIV causes AIDS is an hypothesis which is not supported by facts or evidence, and which has demonstrated no usefulness for predicting or explaining the epidemiology of AIDS.

The advocates of the HIV hypothesis suggest HIV is significantly different from all other viruses in that the presence of antibody alone is sufficient to predict the future development of deadly AIDS symptoms. In all other diseases, however, the presence of antibody in the absence of active virus is a clear sign that the individual's immune system has been exposed to the virus, but successfully responded to it, and defeated it. One is considered "immune" for development of the disease, or from further exposure to that infectious agent. With HIV, however, we are asked to suspend this well-known immunological response, and believe that the presence of antibody alone is synonymous to a death sentence.

HIV=AIDS advocates counter that the virus goes into "hiding" within certain cells of the body, and remains dormant for many years until such time that something triggers them into activity, after which symptoms appear. However, they fail to demonstrate this part of their hypothesis; the "hiding places" have not been demonstrated to any degree of significance. In fact, this absence of demonstrated "hiding viruses" was a major stumbling-block to the general theory of viral causation of diseases. The viral hypothesis of AIDS likewise suffers from this difficulty.

The HIV hypothesis of AIDS does not satisfy Koch's postulates for the identification of a pathogen as the causative agent for a particular disease. These postulates have very successfully guided microbiological research for the last 100 years. They are:

1) The organism must occur in each case of a disease and in amounts sufficient to cause pathological effects;

2) The organism is not found in other diseases; and

3) After isolation and propagation in culture, the organism can induce the disease in an inoculated host. Failure to develop symptoms after inoculation is a sign the organism is not the active agent of the disease.

The HIV hypothesis fails on all the above counts.

There are many examples of people suffering from AIDS symptoms, but who do not show traces of HIV. There are additionally a large number of people in whom traces of HIV have been identified (virus or antibody), but who remain symptom-free for years. This difficulty has prompted some "HIV Fundamentalists" to assert that HIV is unique in the world of viruses, that Koch's postulates don't apply to HIV.

Every year, the group of people identified as "HIV antibody positive" gets larger, partly because of expanded HIV testing programs, but also because so many previously identified antibody-positive people remain alive and healthy. Many have lived over 10 years without developing the predicted AIDS symptoms, or other health problems. And so, the CDC is continually redefining and lengthening the "latency period" for development of AIDS symptoms.

For each year that passes, the latency period is extended by around one additional year. Not only does HIV "hide" in the body, it "sleeps". This is, of course, an unscientific attempt to salvage an hypothesis which fails to accurately predict observed pathology or epidemiology.

continued...

.

Sa_fartman, you are an idiot. I have always espoused non-violent civil disobedience. And you scare me, because you refuse to question your government. This is not the country our Founders envisioned. I just want to return to the country they founded. That is not what we are today.

Violence is not the way to induce change. For one thing, that is something that the government is much better at than anyone else. Why play to their strength? Non-violence and reason is not their strong suit, which is where our strength lies.

The Unabomber was motivated by Al Gore. The 9-11 hijackers were motivated by a distortion of Islam. McVeigh was crazy. I have no commonality with them. I am committed to freedom and liberty, and reclaiming the unalienable rights that have been taken from us. The notion of violence is incompatible with the ends I seek.

But go ahead, make up more stuff about me, and then congratulate yourself on your superiority. I expect nothing less. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's one thing to question, but you explicitly said hate. That doesn leave much room now does it. I'm not making it up, sounds like extremist rhetoric to me.

HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS
A Summary of Current Research Findings

by James DeMeo, Ph.D.


HIV is a difficult and inefficient virus to transmit from one organism to another, either accidentally, by sexual means, or even through deliberate injection.

Many attempts have been made to infect primates with AIDS diseases through direct injection of HIV -- when so exposed, primates may develop typical antibody responses, but do not sicken and die. Around 150 chimpanzees have been injected with HIV by the National Institute of Health, in a program which began ten years ago, and all are still healthy. Needle-stick injuries in hospitals, where hospital workers are accidentally exposed to HIV-infected blood, also fail to demonstrate any cases of AIDS.

The virus simply does not "infect" so easily, and even when it does, produces only the well-known antibody response, but not the symptoms of AIDS.

HIV does not readily or quickly kill the t-helper blood cells, which act as its host. It appears to infect those cells only with great difficulty, and once having infected them, lives quietly and uneventfully within those cells for their normal lifetime, without proliferating significantly to other cells and tissues.

As Peter Duesberg points out, this is the precise nature of a retrovirus, which does not kill its host cell, and leads a rather quiet existence in the organism. By contrast, viruses which produce deadly symptoms proliferate rapidly, infecting many cell types, and they kill the infected cells, thereby producing acute symptoms. Active virus is spread widely in such a virus-sickened organism and is not difficult to identify or locate. HIV does none of this, and for this reason, Duesberg suggests it is probably a perinatally-transmitted retrovirus which has been within a small percentage of the human race for generations, but without any associated pathology.

HIV was observed for the first time only in recent years, because the technology to identify and search for retroviruses was developed in recent years. In a few cases, evidence suggests HIV might produce mild flu-like symptoms within 24-48 hours after infection to a new organism, but after that it has no additional affect upon the individual.
Duesberg points to the fact that, before the retrovirus HIV was discovered, and before AIDS was identified and proclaimed as an infectious disorder, people in high risk groups were dying of the same disease symptoms and were diagnosed quite differently.

Before AIDS, these same symptoms were diagnosed as candidiasis, tuberculosis, pneumonia, syphilis, anemia, dementia, sarcoma, and other diseases or infections well-known to attending physicians.

Today, the diagnosis of "AIDS" is made whenever any of 25+ different disease symptoms appear in the presence of active HIV or HIV antibody. If they display symptoms and have traces of HIV in their blood, the physicians says they have "AIDS"; if no traces of HIV are found, they are diagnosed as having one or more of those original 25+ diseases.

Duesberg points out the incredible potency attributed to this one virus, HIV, which is said to produce such widely varied symptoms -- and yet, as discussed above, laboratory studies of HIV suggest its hidden nature, its non-toxicity, and its difficulty of transmission.

continued...

.

View PDF

Fast Facts

1.2 million people in the United States are living with HIV infection and 1 in 5 are unaware of their infection.
MSM, particularly young, black MSM, are most severely affected by HIV.
By race, African Americans face the most severe HIV burden.
CDC estimates 1.2 million people in the United States (US) are living with HIV infection. One in five (20%) of those people are unaware of their infection. Despite increases in the total number of people in the US living with HIV infection in recent years, the annual number of new HIV infections has remained relatively stable. However, new infections continue at far too high of a level, with approximately 50,000 Americans becoming infected with HIV each year.

In 2009, an estimated 42,011 people were diagnosed with HIV infection in the 40 states with confidential name-based HIV infection reporting since at least January 2006. In that same year, an estimated 34,247 people throughout the US (50 states and the District of Columbia) were diagnosed with AIDS. Since the epidemic began, an estimated 1,108,611 people in the US have been diagnosed with AIDS.

More than 16,000 people with AIDS were estimated to have died in 2008, and nearly 594,500 people with AIDS in the US have died since the epidemic began.

By Risk Group

Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM)1of all races and ethnicities remain the population most severely affected by HIV.

CDC estimates that MSM account for just 2% of the US population, but accounted for 61% of all new HIV infections in 2009. MSM accounted for 49% of people living with HIV infection in 2008 (the most recent year prevalence data are available).
In 2009, white MSM accounted for the largest number of new HIV infections of any group in the US, followed closely by black MSM.
Young, black MSM were the only risk group in the US to experience statistically significant increases in new HIV infections from 2006–2009.
Estimates of New HIV Infections in the United States, 2009, for the Most-Affected Subpopulations


Subpopulations representing 2% or less of the overall US epidemic are not reflected in this chart.

Heterosexuals and Injection Drug Users also continue to be affected by HIV.

Heterosexuals accounted for 27% of estimated new HIV infections in 2009 and 28% of people living with HIV infection in 2008.
Injection drug users represented 9% of new HIV infections in 2009 and 17% of those living with HIV in 2008.
HIV infections among women are primarily attributed to heterosexual contact or injection drug use. Women accounted for 23% of estimated new HIV infections in 2009 and 25% of those living with HIV infection in 2008.

By Race/Ethnicity

Estimated New HIV Infections, 2009, by Transmission Category



Blacks continue to experience the most severe burden of HIV.

Blacks represent approximately 14% of the US population, but accounted for an estimated 44% of new HIV infections in 2009.
At some point in their life, approximately 1 in 16 black men will be diagnosed with HIV infection, as will 1 in 32 black women.
In 2009, the estimated rate of new HIV infections among black men was six and a half times as high as that of white men, and more than two and a half times as high as that of Latino men and of black women. In the same year, the estimated rate of new HIV infections among black women was 15 times that of white women and over three times that of Latina women.

Estimated Rate of New HIV Infections, 2009, by Gender and Race/Ethnicity


Latinos are also disproportionately affected by HIV.

Latinos represented 16% of the population but accounted for 20% of new HIV infections in 2009.
In 2009, the estimated rate of new HIV infections among Latino men was two and a half times that of white men. That same year, the rate of new HIV infections among Latina women was four and a half times that of white women.

*This fact sheet highlights key information about those most affected by HIV infection in the United States.
1The term men who have sex with men (MSM) is used in CDC surveillance systems. It indicates the behaviors that transmit HIV infection, not how individuals self-identify in terms of their sexuality.