Click to get your own widget

Sunday, February 13, 2005


Apparently a hospital in the US have found a new strain of AIDS. Thus
Normally HIV can take up to 10 years before it develops into Aids, but the new strain damages the immune system at a far greater rate, so it becomes Aids within a couple of months.

When AIDS was first known about in the early 80s we were told that everybody who got the HIV virus was going to quickly develop AIDS & die within months. AIDS was, we were assured a disease caused by the HIV retrovirus (part of a family of virii) & that the only ways of stopping it were (1) finding a vaccine, (2) giving up non-monogamous sex (3) waiting till the susceptible population are overwhelmingly unavailable (with most diseases this happens when most people have had it & recovered & thus immunised - for AIDS we are told no recovery is possible).

In fact the preponderant balance of evidence is that the whole AIDS industry is a lie. That AIDS is not & never was caused by the HIV virus. Instead it is caused by stressing your immune system by consuming large amounts drugs, male sperm (in men) or foreign blood. This is the only thing that can explain the disease almost wholly limiting itself to those groups rather than engaging in geometric growth throughout the entire population, as the laws of mathematics say will happen with any communicable disease.

If you are interested in more on this try

There are a number of double-blind tests & surveys which could be made relatively cheaply to prove or disprove the theory. While there are billions available for research on medicines for AIDS (many of which are extremely toxic & if used on healthy people would kill as many healthy people as those previously healthy people who officially die from AIDS while taking such medicines), the thousands required for testing are unavailable.

If I am wrong on this then in a couple of years we will be being told either that this new strain of retrovirus is not more dangerous than the old one or at least that it takes a couple of years to develop into AIDS. Over the last 20 years the official maximum time it takes for HIV to turn into AIDS has been going up 1 year with every year that passes.

Before anybody asks - AIDS is not identified in Africa by proving "positive" on an HIV test, but merely by declaring that anybody who is ill, suffering from malnutrition etc, is AIDS positive. This explains how the existence of an "epidemic" can be "proven".

Dear Mr. Craig,

I am living with HIV now for 20+ years. I also worked in the pharmaceutical industry and helped develop AZT in a support role as a clinical data management programmer.

I can assure you that the idea of a conspiracy to create the AIDS myth is preposterous. My friends have not died from consuming too much cum, from overtaxing their immune systems with drugs or from any of the other causes you mentioned.

Quite simply, they died when their bodies were overwhelmed with HIV copies and their immune systems crashed. We can now measure the number of copies of HIV that exist in each mililiter of blood. While the goal of current therapies is to bring the number of copies of virus to an undetectable level, these therapies fail because of drug mutations. When the last of my friends died of AIDS this summer, he has 1.6 million copies of virus/ml of blood.

People in Africa are not given the test because their healthcare systems can not afford the test. The fact that the infected there are only diagnosed after they present with symptoms is the same situation that the gay community experienced in the West before a test was developed.

As evidence that the AIDS epidemic is caused by HIV, look at the decline in death rates in the West since the implementation of protease inhibitor drugs. These drugs target the HIV virus specifically. The virus that has just been discovered in New York is one that has mutated from the overexposure (superinfection) of a man who didn't believe enough in the virus to protect himself. Now we are all at risk from a much more virulent strain that kills much more quickly.

You are entitled to whatever belief you find most appropriate for you. I hope that my thoughts in this matter can convince you that the virus is real and that it kills. Either way, isn't it worthwhile to protect yourself from the virus "just in case"?

If you wish to read about what the loss of my friends has meant to me or about what it is like to live with HIV today, you can check my blog, 2sides2ron.
Ron I don't have your experience.

I don't have medical qualifications.

I am not 100% sure I am right - note I said the "preponderant balance of evidence" applied.

And I don't want to hurt you.


Everything I said here is true. If AIDS is as dangerous as we were told, or even if it was any sort of communicable virus, it would have spread at a geometric rate as promised. Your own example of being HIV positive for 20 years is compatible with the theory that HIV is only a group marker & is not highly, or at all, deadly. As I pointed out the possible survival time with HIV is being increased by a year every year.

As regards AZT:
Dr. Andrew Herxheimer, Emeritus Professor of Pharmacology, UK Cochrane Centre, Oxford said
"I think zidovudine [AZT] was never really evaluated properly and that its efficacy has never been proved, but it's toxicity certainly is important. And I think it has killed a lot of people. Especially at the high doses. I personally think it not worth using alone or in combination at all." (Continuum Oct. 2000)

If this is correct & I think you will confirm it's toxicity, then, if AIDS is not a virus, this is a remedy that make leeches look worthwhile.

As regards the "conspiracy" - first I suggest you check my earlier article on politically correct science. Scientists, like human beings generally, have an immense ability to convince themselves in all good faith of things it is convenient to believe. It was undoubtedly very useful to discover in the 80s that AIDS was a disease that was about to spread into the general community. Had it remained a drug user/gay disease it would have been difficult to fund treatment (cynical but you know its true). Now there is vast amounts of money & careers dependent on this house of cards.

Even if I am wrong & everything the industry says is correct they are still wrong. Science is a process of making a hypothesis & testing it to destruction & building a new hypothesis from the bits. Any theory has to be tested. Even the theory that the world is round got tested by satellites so that we now know it diverges very slightly from a perfect sphere. Whenever it is not tested we have left the realm of science & entered that of faith. That Professor Deusberg cannot get the relatively tiny grants to test this hypothesis means that viral AIDS is being driven by a political not scientific agenda.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.