- Joined
- Nov 15, 2003
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 0
ALL DOCTORS NEED TO READ THIS
HIV does not cause AIDS.
You are skeptical?so am I. But according to the website aliveandwell.org, we may need to rethink the HIV =AIDS paradigm. This website is simply fascinating.
I have yet to do the follow-up research, but her information is well-referenced, simple, and easy to understand. The most salient points (much of this is verbatim from her book):
1. HIV is a retrovirus. Few, if any, retroviruses are shown to cause disease in humans, in fact, the healthy human body normally has hundreds in its system. Retroviruses are not cytotoxic. So how does HIV kill T-cells?
2. AIDS is not a new illness, it is a category of old illnesses, all with their own specific, scientific causes that do not require the virus HIV. The way AIDS is defined, however, makes it seem there is a one-to-one correlation between HIV and AIDS:
Pneumonia + negative HIV test = pneumonia
Pneumonia + positive HIV test = AIDS
3. Most healthy people have had infections with cell-killing viruses like those that cause herpes and mononucleosis. These viruses infect millions of T cells-- up to half of all immune cells?without causing T cell depletion and without causing AIDS.
4. The AIDS test is not specific and there are many factors causing a false positive, including pregnancy, the flu, flu vaccination, herpes, and about 60 others.
5. HIV virus has not been isolated from fresh plasma.
6. In order for the ELISA to work in testing for HIV (which only tests for antibodies that react with HIV, not virus), the blood has to be diluted 400 times. Otherwise, everyone tests positive.
7. There are demonstrated ways of sufficiently impairing one?s immune system that can invite AIDS defining illnesses and that do not rely on the HIV virus, like malnutrition and lack of sleep (think Africa), drugs including AZT, crack, cocaine, heroin, and nitrites, exposure to chronic infections with venereal disease and others like TB, malaria, hepatitis, chronic anxiety, panic, stress, and depression. A profound fear of AIDS is enough to cause people who repeatedly test HIV negative to develop physical symptoms of AIDS.
There is no denial that AIDS-defining illnesses are deadly. However, why HIV? Why do we need this virus, when there are known causes for these diseases?
The biology is compelling. The background of the story is even more so. This is an excerpt from Maggiore?s book, which you can read entirely on the website at aliveandwell.org
:
On April 23, 1984, Gallo called an international press conference in conjunction with the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). He used this forum to announce his discovery of a new retrovirus described as "the probable cause of AIDS." Although Gallo presented no evidence to support his tentative assumption, the HHS immediately characterized it as "another miracle of American medicine...the triumph of science over a dreaded disease." (16)
Later that same day, Gallo filed a patent for the antibody test now known as the "AIDS test." By the following day, The New York Times had turned Gallo's proposal into a certainty with front page news of "the virus that causes AIDS," and all funding for research into other possible causes of AIDS came to an abrupt halt. (17)
By announcing his hypothesis to the media without providing substantiating data, Gallo violated a fundamental rule of the scientific process. Researchers must first publish evidence for a hypothesis in a medical or scientific journal, and document the research or experiments that were used to construct it. Experts then examine and debate the hypothesis, and attempt to duplicate the original experiments to confirm or refute the original findings. Any new hypothesis must stand up to the scrutiny of peer review and must be verified by successful experiments before it can be considered a reasonable theory.
In the case of HIV, Gallo announced an unconfirmed hypothesis to the media who reported his idea as if it were an established fact, inciting government officials to launch new public health policies based on the unsubstantiated notion of an AIDS virus. Some attribute these violations of the scientific process to the atmosphere of terror and desperation that surrounded the notion of an infectious epidemic.
The data Gallo used to construct his HIV/AIDS hypothesis were published several days after his announcement. Rather than supporting his hypothesis, this paper revealed that Gallo was unable to find HIV (actual virus) in more than half of the AIDS patients in his study. (18) While he was able to detect antibodies in most, antibodies alone are not an indication of current infection and are actually an indication of immunity from infection.
His paper also failed to provide a credible explanation as to how a retrovirus could cause AIDS. Gallo suggested that HIV worked by destroying immune cells, but 70 years of medical research had shown that retroviruses are unable to kill cells, and he offered no proof that HIV differed from other harmless retroviruses. In fact, all evidence to date conclusively demonstrates that HIV -- like all retroviruses -- is not cytotoxic.
16. Altman L New York Times, April 23 1984
17. Altman L Researchers Believe AIDS Virus is Found New York Times, April 24 1984 (Dr. James Curran, head of the CDC's AIDS investigating team, calls discovery "the virus that causes AIDS")
18. Gallo found HIV in only 26 of 63 AIDS patients (41%) Source: Gallo R May 4 1984 Science Volume 224 p502
HIV does not cause AIDS.
You are skeptical?so am I. But according to the website aliveandwell.org, we may need to rethink the HIV =AIDS paradigm. This website is simply fascinating.
I have yet to do the follow-up research, but her information is well-referenced, simple, and easy to understand. The most salient points (much of this is verbatim from her book):
1. HIV is a retrovirus. Few, if any, retroviruses are shown to cause disease in humans, in fact, the healthy human body normally has hundreds in its system. Retroviruses are not cytotoxic. So how does HIV kill T-cells?
2. AIDS is not a new illness, it is a category of old illnesses, all with their own specific, scientific causes that do not require the virus HIV. The way AIDS is defined, however, makes it seem there is a one-to-one correlation between HIV and AIDS:
Pneumonia + negative HIV test = pneumonia
Pneumonia + positive HIV test = AIDS
3. Most healthy people have had infections with cell-killing viruses like those that cause herpes and mononucleosis. These viruses infect millions of T cells-- up to half of all immune cells?without causing T cell depletion and without causing AIDS.
4. The AIDS test is not specific and there are many factors causing a false positive, including pregnancy, the flu, flu vaccination, herpes, and about 60 others.
5. HIV virus has not been isolated from fresh plasma.
6. In order for the ELISA to work in testing for HIV (which only tests for antibodies that react with HIV, not virus), the blood has to be diluted 400 times. Otherwise, everyone tests positive.
7. There are demonstrated ways of sufficiently impairing one?s immune system that can invite AIDS defining illnesses and that do not rely on the HIV virus, like malnutrition and lack of sleep (think Africa), drugs including AZT, crack, cocaine, heroin, and nitrites, exposure to chronic infections with venereal disease and others like TB, malaria, hepatitis, chronic anxiety, panic, stress, and depression. A profound fear of AIDS is enough to cause people who repeatedly test HIV negative to develop physical symptoms of AIDS.
There is no denial that AIDS-defining illnesses are deadly. However, why HIV? Why do we need this virus, when there are known causes for these diseases?
The biology is compelling. The background of the story is even more so. This is an excerpt from Maggiore?s book, which you can read entirely on the website at aliveandwell.org
:
On April 23, 1984, Gallo called an international press conference in conjunction with the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). He used this forum to announce his discovery of a new retrovirus described as "the probable cause of AIDS." Although Gallo presented no evidence to support his tentative assumption, the HHS immediately characterized it as "another miracle of American medicine...the triumph of science over a dreaded disease." (16)
Later that same day, Gallo filed a patent for the antibody test now known as the "AIDS test." By the following day, The New York Times had turned Gallo's proposal into a certainty with front page news of "the virus that causes AIDS," and all funding for research into other possible causes of AIDS came to an abrupt halt. (17)
By announcing his hypothesis to the media without providing substantiating data, Gallo violated a fundamental rule of the scientific process. Researchers must first publish evidence for a hypothesis in a medical or scientific journal, and document the research or experiments that were used to construct it. Experts then examine and debate the hypothesis, and attempt to duplicate the original experiments to confirm or refute the original findings. Any new hypothesis must stand up to the scrutiny of peer review and must be verified by successful experiments before it can be considered a reasonable theory.
In the case of HIV, Gallo announced an unconfirmed hypothesis to the media who reported his idea as if it were an established fact, inciting government officials to launch new public health policies based on the unsubstantiated notion of an AIDS virus. Some attribute these violations of the scientific process to the atmosphere of terror and desperation that surrounded the notion of an infectious epidemic.
The data Gallo used to construct his HIV/AIDS hypothesis were published several days after his announcement. Rather than supporting his hypothesis, this paper revealed that Gallo was unable to find HIV (actual virus) in more than half of the AIDS patients in his study. (18) While he was able to detect antibodies in most, antibodies alone are not an indication of current infection and are actually an indication of immunity from infection.
His paper also failed to provide a credible explanation as to how a retrovirus could cause AIDS. Gallo suggested that HIV worked by destroying immune cells, but 70 years of medical research had shown that retroviruses are unable to kill cells, and he offered no proof that HIV differed from other harmless retroviruses. In fact, all evidence to date conclusively demonstrates that HIV -- like all retroviruses -- is not cytotoxic.
16. Altman L New York Times, April 23 1984
17. Altman L Researchers Believe AIDS Virus is Found New York Times, April 24 1984 (Dr. James Curran, head of the CDC's AIDS investigating team, calls discovery "the virus that causes AIDS")
18. Gallo found HIV in only 26 of 63 AIDS patients (41%) Source: Gallo R May 4 1984 Science Volume 224 p502
