There may be some points of disagreement among us dissidents, and that’s fine. One thing I think most of us would agree on is that the current guidelines for treatment of “HIV-disease” (or “AIDS” or “HIV-positive” or “HIV/AIDS”, or whatever they start calling it next month) is toxic, harmful and dangerously unsustainable in the long run. ARVs (Anti-Retrovirals) are even starting to be used illicitly for their “hallucinogenic and relaxing effect” in some quarters of the world.
Likewise, the AIDS mainstream is certainly less than monolithic in their views. There is a lack of agreement among them about how HIV causes immune suppression, or even how HIV came into existence for that matter. One thing they all do seem to agree on is how essential it is that every Poz person take drugs to extend their life. Virtually every website devoted to “HIV/AIDS” (The Body, AIDSMeds, AEGiS, to name just a few) is replete with articles, messages and advertising promoting “compliance”, as well as tips, blogs and discussion groups to address the inevitable “side effects”, which should more accurately be referred to as “direct effects”.
I once belonged to that AIDS mainstream and followed the information available on these websites and from my doctors diligently. When I tested “positive”, I took those drugs. It took time for some things to happen along that path that caused me change my mind.
What follows are but a few examples of items that may help explain what encouraged me to start taking a more skeptical look at what the scaremongering AID$ industry was (and is) trying to convince me and others to do. In my story I Survived AIDS without Drugs I relate my personal experience with and the consequences of compliance in more detail.
For starters, how about this study, entitled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False” by John P. A. Ioannidis, that reports on the integrity of research studies–a bit of an oxymoron, perhaps?
In his summary Ioannidis states:”for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.” If there’s one research field that is bloated with studies, it’s HIV treatment. If there’s one research field that is intractably biased, it’s HIV treatment.
This discredited research, especially the criminal mischief of Robert Gallo, on which all subsequent research is based, is cause enough to question, if not disbelieve the accepted formula: HIV→AIDS→DEATH(unless you take drugs). The evidence of fraud and misconduct means the proof that there is a pathogen to treat does not exist. Even giving the existence of HIV the benefit of doubt, the drug research I demanded as an activist in the 1980s has fallen short.
For example, despite 25-plus years of research, none of the various “anti-retroviral” drugs have ever been officially tested against placebo, yet they are declared to be the only treatment option available. There are many of us who are living–thriving even–with a “positive” diagnosis without drugs but we are not part of the research trials.
One good read that disputes much of the tainted research supporting the AIDS hypothesis is Henry Bauer’s detailed analyses in The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory. Henry continues to expose the fallacies of the myth at his blog.
PRECEDENTS FOR DISEASE MISMANAGEMENT
Then there is the historical record of the global medical-industrial complex, in particular credible reports of previous health disasters due to medical blinders. Peter Duesberg relates one such story in his book Inventing the AIDS Virus. Chapter 1 of that book can be read online here, with a discussion of the SMON “epidemic” starting on page 11. Basically, Japanese virologists spent a dozen years trying to identify the infectious agent of an epidemic in that country in the 1960s, until a pharmacologist and neurologist eventually discover the illness was iatrogenic–caused by a toxic drug used to treat diarrhea.
Janine Roberts’ (remember that name, I will be writing more about her revelations in the future) recent book, Fear of the Invisible convincingly tells a shockingly unorthodox view of the history of epidemics and vaccines. Here’s what she wrote about the manipulation that occurred to ensure reduced numbers of “polio” were reported after introduction of the Salk vaccine:
- In 1956, the health authorities instructed doctors that they were in future only to diagnose polio if a patient has paralytic symptoms for 60 days or more. As polio was diagnosed previously if there were just 24 hours of paralytic symptoms, and as the disease in milder cases frequently lasted less than 60 days, this automatically meant vastly fewer cases of polio would be reported.
Furthermore, it was now decreed that all cases of polio occurring within 30 days of vaccination were to be recorded, not as possibly caused by the vaccine, but as ‘pre-existing’. This regulatory change also ensured that far fewer cases of vaccine failure would be recorded.
Another regulatory change had an even greater impact. Most polio diagnoses during the epidemics had not involved paralysis but muscular weakness and widespread pain. In many cases this was produced by inflammation of the membrane that protects the brain and spinal neuron cells. The CDC described such cases as ‘serious but rarely fatal’. But doctors were now instructed that all such cases must no longer be diagnosed as polio but as viral or aseptic meningitis! The Los Angeles County health authority explained: ‘Most cases reported prior to July 1 1958 of non-paralytic poliomyelitis are now reported as viral or aseptic meningitis’ in accordance with instructions from Washington.’
As a result, the number of cases of meningitis diagnosed went from near zero to many thousands while polio came down equivalently. Between 1951 and 1960 in the United States 70,083 cases of non-paralytic polio were diagnosed – and zero cases of aseptic meningitis. But under the new diagnostic rules this was reversed. Over the next twenty years over 100,000 cases of aseptic meningitis were diagnosed and only 589 cases of ‘non-paralytic polio’.
Similar games have been played concerning AIDS. One quick notorious example is the list of “defining illnesses” that keeps getting expanded to ensure an upward sloping curve on the statistics page at the CDC.
AMERICA’S RECORD WITH HEALTH
Finally, there are these little nuggets of information, courtesy of the World Health Organization (WHO). The United States health systems ranked 37th (!) in the 2000 survey. We ranked 24th in life expectancy and a pathetic 72nd place for “overall health” in 1997. The only thing the US ranks #1 for is how much money we spend on medical intervention (not “health care”… another topic).
Interestingly, “WHO no longer produces such a ranking table, because of the complexity of the task,” according to their website. It is unclear if 22% of their funding (portion paid by the U.S.) was a factor.
Americans like to think we are the brightest and smartest of the world’s citizens. These rankings prove otherwise, at least when it comes to matters of health. Still it is the government of our unhealthy country that pronounced by press conference that it had discovered the cause of AIDS.
These are just three examples of past and ongoing transgressions that give me plenty of cause to question anything coming from the medical establishment. Our nation’s capitalist, profit-based medical culture has always been susceptible to snake oil salesmen. Now, more than ever, it has been hijacked by individuals and institutions who are more interested in grants, awards and royalties than they are my good health.
You’ll just have to excuse me for being the skeptic.