Media Alert: Amazing New Broadcast — "Does HIV Exist?"

"Prepare to be amazed," says George Kenny, host of Electric Politics, of this conversation with journalist Celia Farber on the topic of the AIDS debate and the big question about HIV.

Kenny writes, "When reputable — indeed, extraordinarily distinguished — scientists began to question whether HIV causes AIDS the backlash was stunning. Yet, to me, as a non-scientist, the skeptics make a lot of sense. And I question the establishment's explanation for why nobody has actually isolated an "HIV" virus. Perhaps the more radical case that HIV doesn't, in fact, exist, is right. What a thought! To get a graceful and philosophical, even poetic, look at what's going on I turned to the courageous independent journalist Celia Farber. I very much enjoyed talking with Celia and hope she'll be a return guest, perhaps on other subjects as well.

Total running time one hour and 14 minutes. Click here to listen: www.electricpolitics.com

Some 24 years after Dr. Robert Gallo told the world media he had discovered the cause of AIDS, a retrovirus later named HIV, the 2008 Nobel Prize in medicine honored the alleged discovery of HIV with awards to French researchers Dr. Luc Montagnier and Dr. Francoise Barre-Sinoussi and without a mention of Robert Gallo.

Media stories reporting on the Nobel announcement do not disclose why Gallo was omitted from the award, or how he managed to take credit for a discovery he apparently didn't make for more than two decades.

Coverage of the prestigious prize also fails to mention Montagnier's astounding admission that he and Barre-Sinoussi were not actually able to isolate or purify HIV from the cultures they believed contained the virus. Instead, they assumed HIV was present because of the detection of biochemical activities associated with the type of virus they believed HIV is.

As Montagnier put it in a 1997 interview with journalist Dejamel Tahi (Did Luc Montagnier Discover HIV?), "It is not one property but the assemblage of the properties which made us say it was a retrovirus...You cannot purify [HIV], but if you know somebody who has antibodies against the proteins of the virus, you can purify the antibody/antigen complex..."

Tahi's conversation with Montagnier captures him dancing around questions about purification of HIV with answers that often contradict themselves. When Tahi asked, "Why no purification?" Montagnier replies, "I repeat, we did not purify. We purified to characterize the density of the reverse transcriptase, which was soundly that of a retrovirus."

Once thought to be unique to retroviruses, reverse transcriptase activity is now known to be a part of normal cellular functions and its presence does not necessarily equate to the presence of a retrovirus.

As for photographic evidence of what is often characterized as the most important scientific discovery in human history, Montagnier told Tahi that he was quite sure such evidence existed...he just couldn't say where:

Tahi: "Do electron microscope pictures of HIV from the purification exist?"

Montagnier: "Yes. of course.

Tahi: "Have they been published?

Montagnier: "I couldn't tell you...we have some somewhere...but it is not of interest, not of any interest."

In a film interview from 2007, Montagnier offers other startling remarks that make him sound more like an "AIDS dissident" than an HIV advocate:

• HIV alone cannot cause AIDS, it requires co-factors
• Oxidative stress is the most important co-factor
• The immune systems of people that are healthy and properly nourished render HIV harmless
• Antiretroviral drugs for AIDS are toxic, do not specifically target HIV, and cannot be tolerated over the course of a lifetime

The choice to leave Gallo out of the prize may have something to do with recently published documents showing that Gallo adjusted his findings just days before their historic publication in the journal Science to make dramatic but totally unfounded claims about HIV. These documents, secured through the Freedom of Information Act by investigative journalist Janine Roberts, show quite clearly that Gallo did not discover a new retrovirus or prove it as the cause of AIDS.

One of the documents Roberts uncovered is a letter from Dr. Matthew Gonda, head of the US National Institutes of Health Electron Microscopy Lab, which was sent to Gallo's assistant, Dr. Mika Popovic, a month before Gallo announced his supposed discovery of HIV (then called HTLV). In this letter, Gonda warns that the electron microscope images Gallo plans to submit to Science are of cellular debris rather than a new retrovirus. He writes, "Dr. Gallo wanted these [electron] micrographs for publication because they contained HTLV particles [however] I would like to point out that the 'particles' are in the debris of a degenerated cell. No other extracellular 'virus-like particles' were observed free between cells anywhere in the pellet. The small extracellular vesicles are at least 50% smaller than HTLV mature particles...Again these vesicles can be found in any cell pellet. I do not believe any of the particles photographed are HTLV..."

Another remarkable document unearthed by Roberts is a draft of one of the four seminal papers by Gallo eventually published in Science and still used as the basis for claims that HIV is the cause of AIDS. Originally prepared by Popovic and dated just seven days before Gallo's infamous media announcement, the draft shows how Gallo made extensive handwritten "corrections" to Popvic's modest but honest statements, angrily crossing out inconvenient data and adding—with no scientific justification—bold claims that the virus that caused AIDS had been discovered. The most telling of the crossed-out lines: "Despite intensive research efforts, the causative agent of AIDS has not yet been identified."

A copy of this draft of the Science article with Gallo's cross-outs and handwritten notes may be seen at the web site of health advocate Gary Null who recently held a press conference with Roberts. (garynull.com). The entire collection of Gallo papers can be found in Robert's new book, Fear of the Invisible

With a name that roughly translates to the Human Rights Organization for HIV/AIDS Reappraisal, a small group of AIDS rethinkers are making a big impact in South Korea.

According to one of the group's founders, their questioning of the HIV hypothesis generated from within the country, specifically from an activist named Bara who was investigating alternative treatments for cancer and AIDS.

Raymund, a spokesperson for the Korean group, says, "Bara was dedicated to human rights activities for long time, and was also very interested in incurable diseases. He had written a book called 'Cancer, Yet We Have Hope' before becoming interested in AIDS. The more he studied about AIDS, the more skeptical he became. 'It's so strange,' he said, 'but I could not help thinking it does not really exist.' For a long time he felt he could not share this idea with anybody because he felt it was quite extraordinary.

"Bara finally revealed his thoughts to one of his best friends who told him the idea that HIV didn't cause AIDS seemed perfectly rational. Inspired by that experience, Bara studied more and more. Eventually, by chance, he learned of the dissident views about HIV promoted by researchers in the US, Australia, and other countries.

"With a strong conviction that he was doing right thing, Bara became the first dissident activist in Korea and created our organization which currently has 1,500 members. More than one million people have visited our website so far where papers by American, Australian and European 'AIDS dissidents' are available in Korean (http://www.noaids.co.kr).

"In January 2003, we published the first dissident Korean book 'There is No AIDS,' written by Bara. In February 2007, we began distribution of the American documentary 'The Other Side of AIDS' with Korean subtitles. We are now awaiting the publication of Celia Faber's book 'Serious Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS' in Korean."

Raymund reveals that his group "suffers severe persecution and reproach from orthodox AIDS organizations such as the Korean Alliance to Defeat AIDS."

But despite the attacks he says, "We have stood up under pressure and have saved many HIV-positives in Korea and given them hope."

HIV/AIDS vigilantes have accused HIV Skeptics and AIDS Rethinkers of contributing to the death toll by influencing some people to resist antiretroviral treatment. The enumeration of names of people who refused antiretroviral treatment and died is among the unsavory tactics of the vigilantes at "AIDSTruth" (see, for example, "Questioning HIV/AIDS: Morally Reprehensible or Scientifically Warranted?", Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 12 [#4, Winter 2007] 116-120).

One problem with the AIDSTruth tactic is that their list of people who died lacks necessary information about the health risks that had affected the named individuals. The death of any given "HIV-positive" person who was not taking antiretroviral drugs might have resulted from any one of a large number of possible causes. Some of those on the list had taken AIDS medications for many years before quitting because of adverse effects, or because of a change of perspective; others had a history of compromised health caused by long-term drug or alcohol addiction, or health challenges not related to AIDS. Much of this information is not mentioned.

A direct response to the AIDSTruthers' exploitation of people's deaths is the appended list of high-profile AIDS activists, treatment advocates, and celebrities who followed doctors' orders to consume AIDS drugs and died anyway — often in the prime of their lives — from the very AIDS illnesses they believed the drugs would prevent, or from heart attacks, organ failures, cancers, or other conditions characteristic of chronic exposure to toxic anti-HIV chemicals. Notice that some of these deaths of AIDS activists are attributed to "AIDS-related conditions" or "AIDS complications" — terms that fail to disclose whether the death resulted from a heart attack, a stroke, diabetes, lactic acidosis, cancer, liver failure, or some other adverse effect of AIDS drugs.

As I've pointed out on several earlier occasions, the official Treatment Guidelines acknowledge that such "side" effects of HAART are responsible for more mortality than the "disease" supposedly being treated.

"In the era of combination antiretroviral therapy, . . . the risk of several non-AIDS-defining conditions, including cardiovascular diseases, liver-related events, renal disease, and certain non-AIDS malignancies [97-102] is greater than the risk for AIDS in persons with CD4 T-cell counts >200 cells/mm3; the risk for these events increases progressively as the CD4 T-cell count decreases from 350 to 200 cells/mm3" (p. 13, 28 January 2008 version).

Despite this acknowledgment, the numbers of "AIDS" or "HIV disease" deaths reported each year in the US are actually the numbers of people who tested "HIV antibody positive" or were living with an official AIDS diagnosis when they died of any cause at all, be it an accident, a homicide or suicide, or a non-AIDS illness like diabetes that may be a "side" effect of antiretroviral drugs [Walensky et al., cited in HIV/AIDS SCAM: Have antiretroviral drugs saved 3 million life-years?, 6 July 2008 ].

A recent post [HAART saves lives--- but doesn't prolong them!?, 17 September 2008] noted that the dramatic drop in deaths between 1996 and 1997, by about half, had not been accompanied by any dramatic increase in the median age at which HIV-positive people were dying: that median age had been increasing at about the same rate — ~0.4 years per year — since 1982. A nitpicker might point out that the rate was only ~0.3 years per year up to 1993 and about twice that thereafter — predictably, because since 1993 the definition of "AIDS" had included people with low CD4 counts but who are asymptomatic — i.e., people who are not ill —, a definition not adopted in such other regions as Australia, Britain, Canada, or Europe. "Side" effects of antiretroviral drugs would naturally take longer to kill people who had been initially healthy than those who had presented with some sort of illness at diagnosis.

Eleven of the people named below died before the HAART era, and 26 died after the introduction of HAART in 1996.

AZT medication from 1987 to 1996 can be blamed for at least 150,000 deaths [HAART saves lives--- but doesn't prolong them!?]: the immediate 50% decline in deaths from 1996 to 1997 seems the direct result of desisting from the administration of high doses of AZT. But HAART typically includes appreciable amounts of AZT or a similar drug, so HAART remains toxic, even if somewhat less so than pure high-dose AZT.

The latest published claims for HAART include that life expectancy for 20-year-old HIV-positives had increased by 13 years between 1996 and 2005 to an additional 49 years, and for 35-year-olds the life expectancy in 1996-99 was said to be another 25 years (Antiretroviral Therapy Collaboration, Lancet 372 [2008] 293-99). But the death statistics show that the median age of death from "HIV disease" was still only 45 in 2004 [HAART saves lives--- but doesn't prolong them!?]; and, indeed, the 26 people listed below who died after 1996 averaged 44 years of age at death. The activists' refrain that AIDS is now a chronic, manageable condition is contradicted by the facts — at least for those "HIV-positive" people who accept antiretroviral treatment

Researching and preparing this post has been no pleasant task. Death comes to all of us sooner or later, and most of us summon sympathy and empathy over any human death. Not many people are willing to use deaths of named individuals as talking points in an argument, as the AIDSTruthers do.

Unfortunately, the only answer that might be heard by these vigilantes is to cite deaths that directly contradict their claim, for the AIDSTruthers have explicitly refused to engage in reasoned, evidence-based discussion, and they have shown themselves impervious to more general argument. So, while regretting the need to do so, we present these data to correct the one-sided story put forth by the AIDSTruth vigilantes.

We even understand — apparently, unlike the AIDSTruth Team — that anecdotes or lists cannot serve to establish reliable generalizations. Nevertheless, because these prominent AIDS "activists" and proponents of HAART were as well placed as anyone could be, to know about and to receive the very best antiretroviral treatment, their premature deaths do seem probative of the claims made for HAART. Moreover, their average age of death is consistent with the statistical data from death certificates reported by the Center for Health Statistics [Table 2 in HAART saves lives--- but doesn't prolong them!?].

Click HERE here to view the list.

We are still being told that Africa suffers a devastating AIDS epidemic. The gigantic numbers of infections yield gigantic amounts of public funds for research and thus researchers. What scientific judgment can we expect from experts who stand for a broad-based conviction that guarantees their income?

By Christian Fiala, MD, PhD

It took two decades, but finally we are being told the truth: most of what AIDS experts and the media have led us to believe is wrong.

First, UNAIDS admitted last December that it had overestimated the worldwide total number of people infected with HIV by a staggering 7 million, out of an estimated 40 million. This is a remarkable admission, coming after years of using inflated numbers in its highly successful campaign for more funding.

But the true overestimate is more than twice as high at 15 million, according to Dr. James Chin, the person formerly responsible for these very data at UNAIDS.

Dr. Chin has shared some of his inside knowledge in a new book with the telling title: The AIDS Pandemic: The Collision of Epidemiology with Political Correctness. In it he reveals that an AIDS epidemic was never expected in Europe or North America. He also explains how the inflated figures were used to scare the population and to argue for higher budgets.

The next revelation was an article in the well-respected British Medical Journal in May: "The writing is on the wall for UNAIDS." Author Roger England explains: "It is no longer heresy to point out that far too much is spent on HIV relative to other needs and that this is damaging health systems." Based on data and arguments, he recommends that "UNAIDS should be closed down rapidly because its mandate is wrong and harmful."

Finally in June, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/AIDS, Dr. Kevin de Cock, officially admitted that HIV outside sub-Saharan Africa was confined to high-risk groups.

These admissions of obvious facts come late. Many people realized long ago that HIV/AIDS is not a threat to the heterosexual population in Europe or North America in contrast to the numerous campaigns during the last two decades, intended to make us believe that "everyone is at risk." And those familiar with the data know there was never any reason to believe an epidemic would occur: In short: "For over twenty years, the general public has been greatly misled and ill-informed", explains Rebecca Culshaw, a scientist who has been working on mathematical models of HIV infection.

Now that the AIDS frenzy of an epidemic in the general population is finally over, it's just a question of time until public and private donors translate these facts into a reallocation of their budgets.

But what about Africa? Most people still believe what we've been told: A terrible HIV/AIDS epidemic is ravaging poor countries, mainly due to the heterosexual spread of HIV — which oddly enough is not occurring in Europe or North America. This discrepancy is just one of many contradictions in widely-held beliefs about AIDS. Another is the continuously high or even increasing population growth rate in countries said to be hit by a deadly HIV/AIDS epidemic. The best example is Uganda. This country was once hailed as the "epicentre of a worldwide epidemic." The journal Newsweek wrote back in 1986: "Nowhere is the disease more rampant than in the Rakai region of south-west Uganda, where 30 percent of the people are estimated to be seropositive." In 1995, the World Health Organization confirmed that "by mid-1991 an estimated 1.5 million Ugandans, or about 9 percent of the general population and 20 percent of the sexually active population, had HIV infection." Subsequently, estimates of the number of HIV-positive Ugandans increased even further, to 15 percent of the total population. Most were expected to die prematurely with disastrous consequences for their families and the country.

So it comes as a shock to look at Uganda today and find no trace of the predicted premature death of millions of people. Instead, Uganda is a country struggling with dramatic population growth. It has always had a very high growth rate, but for the last 15 years, it's been among the fastest growing countries in the world. Mortality has remained constant or even declined, while fertility rates have remained high and stable.

In other words, instead of the announced deadly epidemic of historic proportions we find an explosive annual population growth rate of 3.4 percent, which means the country is doubling its population in 21 years.

Obviously, this is paradoxical. But the contradiction between a predicted deadly epidemic and a dramatic population increase can easily be explained: most people who were HIV positive 15 years ago did not die prematurely as expected, but continued to live a normal life.

Therefore, the basic assumption in the HIV/AIDS paradigm — that a positive HIV test leads to AIDS and certain premature death — is wrong, as proven by the example of Uganda.

The obviously and admittedly inflated figures were based on wrong assumptions, baseless estimates, and fundamental mistakes in epidemiology. To begin with, HIV tests are highly inaccurate in Africa, as several studies have documented. Tests are typically done on a small number of people and the results extrapolated to the total population.

Furthermore, in 1986 WHO created a new definition of AIDS that was valid in poor countries only, and based on unspecific symptoms. According to this so-called Bangui definition, someone has AIDS if he is suffering from weight loss, fever, and cough. But these are the typical symptoms of tuberculosis, a widespread disease in poor countries. In short, the Bangui definition diagnoses well-known diseases and gives them a new name: AIDS. This re-labeling of frequently occurring diseases explains the huge increase of "AIDS cases" in the last 20 years in Africa, even while the total number of people dying has remained stable.

When the number of AIDS cases based on the Bangui definition were reported to UNAIDS headquarters in Geneva, even more cases were added to adjust for alleged "underreporting." Over the years, this padding increased drastically to the point where UNAIDS claimed in 1997 that only 3 percent of the estimated new AIDS cases in Africa had actually been reported. The other 97 percent were created on paper in Geneva.

At this point, AIDS experts arrived at a dead end. They could not possibly inflate their numbers further without losing all credibility. Instead, they simply changed strategies and stopped publishing details of how they obtain their HIV/AIDS data.

The strategy of presenting inflated figures and repeatedly announcing an imminent catastrophe has paid off handsomely for those who make their living off HIV/AIDS. As early as 1989, the German Medical Board wrote in its journal that the only explanation for the "confusing" way AIDS statistics are compiled is that "huge figures bring in large amounts of public money" to AIDS research and, by extension, into the pockets of the researchers.

Back in 1989, the authors probably never imagined just how prophetic their comment would be. HIV/AIDS is an unprecedented success story for those who make their living from it. So it's not surprising how anxious they are to defend conventional beliefs about HIV/AIDS (and their income). An impressive example is the reaction to Roger England's recent critical article in the well-respected British Medical Journal (as cited above). The author probably knew what he was talking about when he predicted: "Putting HIV in its place among other priorities will be resisted strongly. The global HIV industry is too big and out of control. We have created a monster with too many vested interests and reputations at stake." Reading the emotional reactions to this well-written and well-researched article conveys the impression of "the empire striking back." But the letters revealed something even more troubling: the majority were written by people affiliated with an HIV/AIDS organization, but not one of them disclosed a conflict of interest — an ethical requirement in the scientific literature.

What kind of quality of scientific judgment can we expect from experts who defend a widely-held belief that guarantees their income and who are unable to see an obvious conflict of interest?

Unfortunately, the almost hysterical focus on HIV/AIDS in Africa has done much harm over the last two decades. First, the huge political pressure has turned health care priorities upside down. Common problems or diseases are neglected. For example, Africa is a continent so poor that almost half of its population has no access to clean drinking water, and alleviation of this fundamental human need has been scandalously slow.

Second, financial resources are being diverted from other important issues. For example, UNAIDS urged African Ministers of Finance to "redirect existing project resources that could be supporting AIDS — billions of dollars programmed for social funds, education and health projects, infrastructure, rural development".

Third, even interventions like the focus on condoms may be harmful given that abortion is still illegal in most of Africa based on the antiquated laws of the former colonial powers. Condoms are not a very effective contraceptive. And a woman in Africa who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy due to a condom failure has few options except to turn to illegal and unsafe abortion.

Tragically, effective methods of contraception are rarely available or even withheld on the grounds they do not protect from HIV.

Now that the obvious reality has finally been admitted, we can be relieved that the AIDS epidemic is not the killer we were made believe. But how can we prevent a similar deception in the future? One possible strategy is to avoid just believing what scientists tell us, and instead follow Albert Einstein's advice: "The important thing is not to stop questioning".

Christian Fiala, MD, PhD, is an Austrian specialist in obstetrics and gynecology. He is a researcher of AIDS in Uganda and Thailand.

Dr. Peter Duesberg and Dr. Henry Bauer on
Talk Radio Thursday October 2 at 11 a.m. Eastern

Rethinking AIDS Board member Professor Peter Duesberg and Professor Emeritus Henry Bauer, author of "The Origin, Persistence and Failings of the HIV/AIDS Theory" will be together to speak for an entire hour on "Crash! Are You Ready?", the second highest-rated program out of 35 on the GCN radio network among online listeners.

Listen to the live stream at gcnlive.com (Network 4)

Call in toll-free with your questions at 1-800-259-9231.

If you miss it live, the show will be constantly restreaming starting at around 3 p.m. Eastern until the next day's show, or download the podcast at http://www.gcnlive.com/pubpod/crash/pcast.php

For general information about the show, please visit www.hearitonline.com

Peter Duesberg on Talk Radio for Two Hours
Tuesday September 9 at 11 p.m. Eastern

Professor Peter Duesberg will speak for a whole two hours on The Richard Syrett Show on CFRB 1010, the highest-rated talk radio station in Toronto.

You can listen to the live stream on the evening of the broadcast at www.cfrb.com or if you miss in real time, the audio archive should be up at audioarchive by the end of this week.

Duesberg first appeared on Syrett's program this past April 24 and set a record for the most downloaded show for that entire month. Let's see if we can help set another record for September!

For general information about the show, please visit www.richardsyrett.com

New on How Positive Are You?
HIV Testing Traumas

Some of the many problems with so-called HIV tests are revealed through the experiences of people whose lives were sent into a tail-spin over inconsistent or false results. Hosts David Crowe and Christine Maggiore talk with Richard, a young gay man who took a series of tests and got a series of conflicting results — some from the same lab, some from different labs — which included different results on the same day. They also chat with Mike who tested HIV positive and lived with the devastating diagnosis for several years before discovering his results were wrong. Before the guests join the program, David and Christine review recent AIDS news.

Click here here to listen to this and other podcasts of How Positive Are You?

Poor Sanitation Poses Greater Risk than AIDS to Africans
Contaminated Water = Disease and Death

According to a leading hygiene specialist from Ghana, lack of clean water is a greater risk to the health of many African populations than AIDS.

Speaking with a national news agency, Emmanuel Nyavor of the Volta Regional Community Water and Sanitation Agency in Ghana noted that diarrheal disease caused by water contaminated with human and animal feces is the leading cause of child mortality in his country. The second top cause of death among children in Ghana is non-AIDS pneumonia.

Nvavor spoke as part of the United Nations International Year of Sanitation organized in collaboration with UNICEF. The program seeks to raise awareness of poor sanitation and its effects on the health and development of nations like Ghana where more than 15,000 children below the age of five die every year from preventable diarrheal disease due to unclean water.

Unfortunately, western relief agencies give funding priority to AIDS programs in countries where providing clean water — at a small fraction of the cost of AIDS efforts — would save countless millions of lives. Another challenge to meeting needs for safe water in Africa is the lack of celebrity support for this relatively simple and inexpensive to solve problem.

Read the whole report at news.myjoyonline.com

AIDS Industry Defectors Expose "Myths and Opportunism" and Confess That "Money Eclipses Truth"

A growing number of former AIDS industry insiders are now coming clean about having misled the public with scare stories about HIV and AIDS in order to rally support and increase funding for their work.

Dr Michael Fitzpatrick, author of the 1987 book, The Truth About the AIDS Panic, says in an August 29 article at Spiked Online, "It is a shame that AIDS insiders did not expose the myths and opportunism of the AIDS industry earlier, but better late than never."

Fitzpatrick refers to two recently released books, one by James Chin, an epidemiologist working in the World Health Organization's Global Program on AIDS from the late 1980s to the early 1990s, and another by Elizabeth Pisani, a journalist turned epidemiologist for UNAIDS, the agency that took over the global AIDS crusade in 1996.

"Once prominent advocates of the familiar doomsday scenarios, both Chin and Pisani have now turned whistleblowers on their former colleagues in the AIDS bureaucracy, a 'byzantine' world, according to Pisani, in which "money eclipses truth," Fitzpatrick writes.

In his new position of whistleblower Chin, the author of The AIDS Pandemic: The Collision of Epidemiology with Political Correctness, alleges that the notion of a heterosexual AIDS pandemic "is an example of a glorious myth, a tale that is gloriously or nobly false, but told for 'a good cause.'" He asserts that government and international health agencies along with AIDS advocate organizations such as the WHO "have distorted HIV epidemiology in order to perpetuate the myth of the great potential for spread into general populations." He further charges that HIV and AIDS estimates and projections are actually "cooked" or made up.

Chin's book also provides numerous examples of how AIDS experts "ride to glory" on declining numbers of estimates that in some cases were inflated by as much as 50%, and take credit for alleviating problems that didn't exist.

"HIV prevalence is low in most populations throughout the world and can be expected to remain low, not because of effective HIV prevention programs," says Chin, "but because the vast majority of the world's populations do not have sufficient risk behaviors to sustain an epidemic."

Chin says he can't understand the lack of critical thinking by his former colleagues in the AIDS industry. "Over the past decade, mainstream AIDS scientists, including most infectious disease epidemiologists, have virtually all uncritically accepted the many glorious myths and misconceptions UNAIDS and AIDS activists continue to perpetuate."

Fitzpatrick points out that while many experts fail to question the myths, others knowingly lie. "One shocking example of betrayal [of truth] can be found in a 1996 commentary on the British AIDS campaign entitled 'Icebergs and Rocks of the Good Lie.' In this article, UK Guardian journalist Mark Lawson accepted that the public had been misled over the threat of AIDS but argued that the end of promoting sexual restraint justified the means of exaggerating the risk of HIV infection. As Lawson put it, 'the government has lied and I am glad.'"

Fitzpatrick responds to Lawson's callous comment in the title of his article: "The authorities have lied, and I am not glad."

Author Pisani says there were no lies, only exaggerations, and disputes Chin's claim that UNAIDS deliberately overestimated HIV and AIDS. In her book The Wisdom of Whores: Bureaucrats, Brothels and the Business of AIDS, Pisani admits to manipulating statistics in order to maximize their scare value and keep funding and interest alive. She also acknowledges the falsity of years of ad campaigns she now calls "the everyone-is-at-risk nonsense."

Unfortunately, while Chin, Pisani and Fitzpatrick challenge the veracity of popular claims about HIV and AIDS incidence, they all seem to believe that we can take the word of AIDS researchers on other matters of science. None question the ability of HIV tests to accurately detect HIV infection, the safety and efficacy of AIDS drug treatments or how a non-cell killing virus like HIV could possibly devastate the cells of the immune system. Instead, they advocate "a more coercive approach to both testing and treatment" as part of sound public health policy.

"Public health is inherently a somewhat fascist discipline," says Pisani, who suggests that the quarantine restrictions of HIV positives practiced in countries under dictatorship might work well in democratic nations of the world.

Read Fitzpatrick's entire article at spiked-online.com

"Gallo's Egg", A New Report by LA Police Investigator, Reveals Flaws in HIV Theory and Threats by AIDS Experts Opposed to Debate

Clark Baker, a 28 year veteran investigator for the Los Angeles Police Department, recently looked into charges by AIDS activists that Professor Peter Duesberg and journalist Celia Farber are guilty of mass murder for questioning the role of HIV in AIDS causation.

Baker began his investigation as an unbiased party with no particular interest in AIDS and no idea of the raging international debate about HIV. Through the process of discovery, however, he became not only a staunch proponent of the need to question current beliefs about HIV, but a target for activist threats and harassments.

In producing this report, Baker identified Brian Foley, head of the HIV genome project at the U.S. government's Los Alamos National Laboratory, as one of the sources of harassing emails. Another vociferous and well connected opponent of open dialogue on AIDS turned out to be a student expelled from medical school for plagiarism. He also documents Cornell AIDS researcher John P. Moore’s infamous warning to AIDS rethinkers, "When you’re in a war, there are no rules. This IS a war, there ARE no rules, and we WILL crush you, one at a time, completely and utterly!"

Says Baker, "After having investigated thousands of crimes and arrested hundreds of criminal gang members and other assorted predators, I know a criminal enterprise when I see one. HIV/AIDS makes Enron look like a neighborhood poker game."

Check out a PDF version of Gallo’s Egg at www.rethinkingaids.com or read it online at exlibhollywood.blogspot.com

Audio Commentary on "Gallo’s Egg"
On the air with health freedom advocate Robert Scott Bell, former LAPD officer Clark Baker gives a first hand account of how he approached his investigation into the HIV hypothesis and charges that voicing alternative views on AIDS is tantamount to murder, and how AIDS activists in some surprisingly high places tried to stop him. Listen to the podcast at www.switchpod.com and a follow up discussion at www.switchpod.com

Cracking the Egg Further: Podcasts with Farber and Duesberg on the Baker Report
Celia Farber and Peter Duesberg discuss Gallo's Egg on the Robert Scott Bell radio program. Listen up at www.switchpod.com and to the additional off-air podcast at: www.switchpod.com

Award Winner Celia Farber Attacked by AIDS Activists (Again)
This broadcast from the June 23rd IndyMedia program "From the Trenches" gives background to Gallo’s Egg and insight into attacks on the Semmelweiss Society after they gave their "Clean Hands Awards" to two critics of the AIDS establishment, journalist Celia Farber and Professor Peter Duesberg. Hear the program at chicago.indymedia.org

Listings for New Podcast Program "How Positive Are You?"

Podcast #4: Dismantling AIDS News, Rethinking AIDS in Africa
After a review of recent AIDS news including the latest failed HIV vaccine, the "bad gene" theory of AIDS, and sloppy studies used to make unfounded claims in the media, David and Christine engage in a fascinating conversation with Dr. Charles Geshekter, a professor of African history and expert on the social and economic factors affecting Africa in the 19th and 20th centuries. Subjects include the impact of apartheid on AIDS numbers, the dubious diagnostics and estimates used by AIDS researchers, realities of life and death on the continent, myths about sexual behavior among blacks and more. Check out the new theme music by Steve Porcaro of the world famous 80’s band Toto!

Podcast #3: What is AIDS? plus Steve’s Adventures in HIV Land
David and Christine discuss this seemingly simple question and reveal how AIDS can be diagnosed in healthy HIV positives without disease, how non-AIDS diseases can result in an AIDS diagnosis, and how what is AIDS changes from country to country. Includes a (long) interview with Steve, a man who was told he would go blind or die of AIDS many years ago even though his level of health was good then and remains so today, and despite the fact he’s never followed doctor’s order. Don’t miss his story of the freckle that was called KS or the temporary theme music by Charlie, Christine’s 10 year-old son!

Podcast #2: The Racial Bias in AIDS and HIV Testing
Christine and David examine official news from the World Health Organization that AIDS is over--at least among white heterosexuals--and dubious claims that greater numbers of HIV positives occur among blacks due to sexual behavior. This episode includes excerpts from a special three-hour program on HIV and AIDS originally broadcast on LIB radio with host Keidi Awadu and guests…who made the job of creating original programming for HPAY slightly easier this week. Thanks, Keidi!

Podcast #1: How Positive Are You? The Adventure Begins
How positive are David Crowe and Christine Maggiore about their ability to make a fun and interesting podcast on HIV and AIDS? Will there be enough to talk about? Will there be embarrassing pauses and serious audio problems? Surprisingly, after months of sort of preparing, all goes pretty smoothly. They talk about their international meetings with AIDS rethinkers in Russia and India and about some harrowing experiences of HIV-positives they know. They entertain and engage each other, and will do the same for you, too, if you’ll just excuse the theme music!

AIDS Orthodoxy Accidentally Confirms Drug-AIDS Connection, Finds Risk of "AIDS Diseases" More Likely Among Crack Users

Women with HIV positive test results who regularly use crack are three times more likely to develop AIDS diseases and die—despite adherence to anti-HIV drug treatment—according to a US survey of 1,686 positive testing women who take pharmaceutical antiretroviral treatment.

The survey found that the 29% of participants who regularly or intermittently used crack cocaine were nearly 60% more likely to develop an AIDS-defining illness, and the 3.2% who used it persistently were three times more likely to die, despite adherence to anti-AIDS drug regimens.

Raising the question of what "viral load" actually measures (we know it’s not whole, infectious HIV), the study found that persistent crack users began the survey with "viral loads" that were on average three times higher than intermittent or non-users of crack, and that their "loads" remained higher even when figures were adjusted for reported adherence to treatment regimens.

The survey also found a high death rate among crack using participants with a total of 419 deaths during the study period. Of these 419 deaths, 197 (44%) were attributed to AIDS-related causes, 138 (33%) were officially declared non-AIDS related, while the cause of the remaining 84 deaths were not determined. In other words, 222 of the 419 deaths were not related to HIV or AIDS.

Another finding that strains for explanation within the HIV causes AIDS paradigm: Persistent crack use was more likely to predict a high "viral load" than high adherence to anti-HIV regimens was to predict a low "viral load."

Reporting on the new survey, mainstream AIDS activist/journalist Gus Cairns asks: "Are the study findings due to direct effects of crack on immune status…? Previous studies have shown that cocaine causes immune alterations in T-cells, inhibits the functions of other immune cells like macrophages and neutrophils, suppresses cell-signaling chemicals (cytokines)..and recent studies have also found that cocaine increases the permeability of the blood-brain barrier...and that crack users develop chronic lung disease because of inhaling crack contaminants. [In this study], there was a predominance of respiratory diseases in the women who developed AIDS-defining conditions: 18% developed bacterial pneumonia, 10% PCP and 4% TB."

Read Cairns’ entire article at www.aidsmap.com

Higher Mortality Among HIV Positives? Mainstream Claims Under Scrutiny

At his blog site hivskeptic.wordpress.com, Professor Henry Bauer points out some of the problems behind claims made in the recently published study "Changes in the Risk of Death After HIV Seroconversion Compared With Mortality in the General Population"

One significant problem he notes with the study is that researchers cannot accurately determine dates of sero-conversion among participants or validly estimate when sero-conversion may have occurred. There were very few instances where people included in the study were tested at frequent intervals before so-called sero-conversion, making an approximate date for change in sero-status anyone’s guess.

Another problem with the study is that it does not compare like to like. The multitude of health risk factors documented to be commonly found among HIV positives are not commonly found in the comparison group from general population, a factor which can only skew results.

Even the study’s authors admit that there are striking differences between people who test positive and their control group of healthy HIV negatives culled from non-risk groups: "Although we matched by age, sex, calendar time, and country, it is likely that HIV [positive] individuals in our study differ from the general population in other ways [besides HIV status]. Rates of smoking have been shown to be high…other risk behaviors, socioeconomic factors, and race/ethnicity are also likely to differ among [positive testing] persons. Those [who identify as] IDUs in particular are likely to be at higher risk of mortality than the general population regardless of HIV [status]…"

Bauer vigorously questions the study’s round-about endorsement of AIDS drug therapy offered in this statement: "We found that the gap in mortality rates between HIV-infected individuals in our study and the general population narrowed in every calendar period from 1996 onward."

In reply to the above, Bauer explains, "Everybody familiar with HIV science will recognize the standard ploy used here to guarantee the conclusion that deaths have decreased due to drug therapies. In fact, the AIDS Era is by arbitrary convention divided into a Pre-HAART Era (pre-1996) and a HAART Era (post-1996), and this naming-and-dating-technique allows researchers to disregard all other factors, such as changing the definition of AIDS to include clinically healthy HIV positives, the increased number of clinically healthy persons given AIDS diagnoses in those years, or the fact that the dramatic decrease in AIDS deaths started before HAART came into general use.

"These omissions leave the conclusion that, since there are fewer deaths in the period known as the HAART Era than in the Pre-HAART Era period, HAART must be the direct cause of the lower number of deaths. This ‘unassailable basic premise’ shields the researchers from all alternative explanations to the numerous contradictions they encounter — that is, if it allows them to detect contradictions at all — and unfailingly allows them to reach unwarranted pseudo-conclusions. For example, the authors of this paper conclude that ‘mortality rates for HIV-infected persons have become much closer to general mortality rates since the introduction of highly active anti-retroviral therapy.’ But this is not a scientifically established conclusion; it is simply the premise restated.

"The article’s unjustified take-home message is articulated by lead author Porter who claims in a an accompanying interview that ‘the study underscores the importance that people are identified and treated early.’"

Other commentary on the problems with the new study and its conclusions:

• "The authors want to correlate the increase in ‘uptake of HAART’ with the decrease in excess mortality, but unfortunately, mortality continued decreasing even after uptake of HAART leveled off. But the authors don’t even flinch at this inconsistency. Instead, they credit NNRTI-based HAART and AZT ‘boosters’ with the continued positive trend without offering proof that this is anything more than a convenient assumption."
  
  
• "The authors were not able to establish a straightforward correlation between uptake of HAART and decrease in excess mortality. However, they WERE able to establish a straightforward correlation between better drug adherence and higher mortality! They write, ‘We found that older age was highly predictive of excess mortality prior to 1996, and this effect broadly continued in later calendar periods, despite suggestions in the literature that increasing age is associated with better adherence to HAART.’ In other words, those who rarely miss a pill are at highest risk of dying!"
  
  
• "The authors state, ‘Some studies have found that older individuals experience slower immune recovery following HAART initiation, which could reflect the state of thymic function and may in part account for their continuing excess risk of death,’ but if this is so, why would their ‘slower immune recovery’ be significant since the excess mortality is measured against people with supposedly equally slow immune recovery? It apparently does not trouble the authors that the older people are, the less likely they are to lead the extreme lifestyles that were supposed to be the best explanation for excess excess (repetition intended) mortality. No doubt this study will go up on AIDStruth.org as an example of the rigor of HIV science.

For more information and commentary on this and other topics related to HIV and AIDS, please visit hivskeptic.wordpress.com

AIDS Critics Among Many Censored Scientists
"Against the Tide: A Critical Review by Scientists of How Physics and Astronomy Get Done, edited by Martín Lopez Corredoira and Carlos Castro Perelman, is a collection of essays by physicists, astronomers, and a chemist (our own Dr. Henry Bauer) about how current mainstream science excludes unorthodox views even of well established researchers in other disciplines.

"Viruses and Vaccines, HIV and AIDS: An Investigative Journey into a Reckless and Contaminated Medical Industry" This latest publication by investigative journalist Janine Roberts highlights dubious activity by "HIV co-discover" Dr Robert Gallo, offering proof of his scientific misdeeds in the form of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. These documents include facsimile copies of Gallo’s last minute alterations to the most important HIV paper ever published showing the many handwritten changes that hid the fact that his team had not isolated HIV or proved any virus to cause AIDS.

Robert’s research also shows that Gallo sent off non-specific proteins mischaracterized as HIV proteins to be used to create the first so-called HIV test and did so before doing the experiments claimed today as proving a virus caused AIDS. He then used the same non-specific material for the first PCR probes.

Roberts also shows that "illogical virology does not affect only AIDS. HIV is not the only virus claimed to cause disease that was never properly isolated and proved to cause illness. Many childhood vaccines are based on a nightmare of bad science and illogical presumptions about the nature of viruses and the relationship between cells and viruses. The information here may well help parents whose children have become autistic after receiving vaccinations."

With over 600 footnotes, a scientific glossary and index, Roberts says, "I am hoping this book might eventually help to forge an alliance between the many parent groups worried about vaccines and people worried about HIV."

In an unusual move, Roberts invites critics and skeptics to point out errors in her work. "If any of the science in my book can be shown wrong, I am prepared to produce new editions with corrections. If you see anything questionable in this book, let me know!"

Roberts’ new book can be found at Amazon.com

From the UK, Officials Say AIDS Pandemic is Cancelled

India Asks, “Is HIV the Cause of AIDS?”

New Radio Shows and Podcasts with AIDS Rethinkers

The latest news in AIDS is at least two decades old, but 20 years ago—and as recently as last month—UNAIDS and the World Health Organization continued to deny it, squelching data that showed AIDS was not affecting the general public around the globe.

Back in 1987, Rethinking AIDS board member Gordon Stewart, Emeritus Professor of Public Health at the University of Glasgow, tried unsuccessfully to point out that AIDS predictions didn’t add up and that the notion of a global AIDS epidemic among heterosexual populations was at best a huge mistake, or at worst, a dishonest marketing scheme.

Now, hundreds of billions of dollars later, the recklessly ignored facts are coming to light as the top AIDS official at the World Health Organization finally admits there is no evidence that the world at large is--or ever was--at risk for AIDS, and UNAIDS comes under fire for promoting unfounded fear and squandering precious healthcare dollars on a problem that didn’t exist.

The new official word on AIDS is the old word: Everyone is not at risk; AIDS is confined to distinct high-risk groups such as injection drug users and men having sex with men…except if you live in certain parts of Africa.

According to the new version of orthodox AIDS-think, unlike other people in other parts of the world, heterosexual Black Africans still remain at high risk for AIDS. Dr. James Chin, former epidemiologist for the World Health Organization, claims this is because 20% to 40% of the adult population in sub-Saharan Africa participates in "multiple concurrent overlapping relationships” involving sexual intercourse with several different people and several changing partners every few weeks.

The startling concept of African AIDS epidemics due to wildly promiscuous Blacks and the remarkable admission that 20 years of global AIDS policy followed a false premise have yet to be reported by any major US media.

Excerpted from the June 12, 2008 UK Guardian
The Exploitation of AIDS
By Brendan O’Neill

“The AIDS scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the last 30 years…”

Finally we have a high-level admission that there is no threat of a global AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals. After 25 years of official scaremongering about western societies being ravaged by the disease – with salacious, tombstone-illustrated government propaganda warning people to wear a condom or "die of ignorance" – the head of the World Health Organization's HIV/AIDS department says there is no need for heterosexuals to fret.

Kevin de Cock, who has headed the global battle against AIDS said that outside very poor African countries, AIDS is confined to "high-risk groups,” and even in these communities it remains quite rare. In other words, all that hysterical fear mongering about AIDS spreading among sexed-up western youth was a pack of lies.

Much of the media has treated Dr. De Cock's admission as a startling revelation when in truth, experts have known for many years that in the vast majority of the world, AIDS has little impact on the "general population.” In her new book The Wisdom of Whores, Elizabeth Pisani – who worked for 10 years in what she refers to as "the AIDS bureaucracy" – admits that by 1998 it was clear that "HIV wasn't going to rage through the billions in the 'general population', and we knew it.”

And it isn't the case that the heterosexual pandemic failed to materialize because officialdom's omnipresent pro-condom propaganda was a success. According to James Chin, a clinical professor of epidemiology at the University of California at Berkeley and author of the new book The AIDS Pandemic, it was always a "glorious myth" that there would be an "HIV epidemic in general populations." That myth was the product of "misunderstanding or deliberate distortions of HIV epidemiology" by UNAIDS and other AIDS activists, says Chin.

It is time to recognize that the AIDS scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the past 30 years. Instead of being treated as a sexually transmitted disease that affected certain high-risk communities, the "war against AIDS" was turned into moral crusade.

Governments exploited the disease to create a new moral framework for society. Through baseless fear mongering, officials sought to police and regulate the behavior of the public. No longer able to appeal to outdated Victorian ideals of chastity or restraint, the powers-that-be used the specter of an AIDS calamity to terrify us into behaving "responsibly" in sexual and social matters.

They were aided and abetted by the radical left. Gay rights campaigners, feminists and left-leaning health and social workers stood shoulder-to-shoulder in spreading the "glorious myth" of a possible future AIDS pandemic. An unholy alliance of old-style, prudish conservatives and post-radical, lifestyle-obsessed leftists latched on to AIDS as a disease that might provide them with a sense of moral purpose.

And they ruthlessly sought to silence anyone who questioned them. Those who challenged the idea that AIDS would devour sexually promiscuous young people and transform once-civilized western societies into diseased dystopias were denounced as "AIDS deniers" and "heretics." Anyone who suggested that homosexuals were at greater risk than heterosexuals was denounced as homophobic. Nothing could be allowed to stand in the way of the glorious moral effort to make everyone submit to the sexual and moral conformism of the AIDS crusaders.

Even in Africa, the international focus on AIDS has been motivated more by pernicious moralism than straightforward charity. Diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis are bigger killers than AIDS. Yet focusing on AIDS allows western governments and NGOs to lecture Africans about their morality and personal behavior.

The relentless politicization and moralization of AIDS has not only distorted public understanding of the disease and generated unnecessary fear and angst – it has also potentially cost lives. James Chin estimates that UNAIDS wastes around $1billion a year in activities such as "raising awareness" about AIDS in communities that are at little risk. How many lives could that kind of money save?

Excerpted from Guerilla News Network
June 13, 2008
WHO Confesses to 25 Years of Misguided AIDS Policies…But They Still Want You to Believe Them
By Liam Scheff

It’s official: AIDS is not explicable by sexual transmission, at least not outside of Sub-Saharan Africans, gay men, intravenous drug users and prostitutes. For the rest of us, there is no heterosexual AIDS pandemic, and further, there will be no heterosexual AIDS pandemic.

“Threat of world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits,” The Independent announced on Sunday, June 8, 2008 (mimicking what I have been reporting for years and what some of my colleagues have been reporting for decades).

But take it from someone you trust, Dr. Kevin de Cock of the World Health Organization (WHO): “[T]here will be no generalized epidemic of AIDS in the heterosexual population outside Africa.”

The authorities explain that they misled the entire world, for decades, because admitting the grandeur of their farce would have encouraged their critics: “Any revision of the threat was liable to be seized on by those who rejected HIV as the cause of the disease.” Of course! We’ve got to protect flawed science from criticism!

But, regardless of past and current performance (and admissions of outright massive fraud), the authorities at the WHO and UNAIDS still want you to believe them when they talk about AIDS, Bird Flu, SARS, and other advertised but not achieved super-pandemics.

Such a weak defense might encourage a curious mind to wonder at the other flaws in their paradigm. For example, are we now to believe that there is a virus that causes a fatal disease, but only in Africans, (wherever in the world they may be), gay men and drug addicts? But not the entirety of the human population that is sexually active?

The answer to the riddle may be found in the actual cause of “HIV” – namely, “HIV testing.” Figure out who is tested, how the tests work (or, more to the point, how they don’t work), and who the tests are said to be accurate for, and you’ll get an understanding of how the “AIDS” diagnosis – now, no better than a brand name applied to poverty and drug addiction – actually works.

“HIV tests” come up as “false positives” in numbers far exceeding “true positives”:

“Sir, In the May 9 issue of The Lancet, Round the World correspondents discussed AIDS-associated problems in former Eastern bloc countries…I would like to emphasize another alarming concern – namely, the rapid growth in false-positive HIV tests in the former USSR, and in Russia especially. In 1990, of 20.2 million HIV tests done in Russia only 12 were confirmed and about 20,000 were false positives. 1991 saw some 30,000 false positives out of 29.4 million tests, with only 66 confirmations.” (The Lancet, June 1992)

They have no ability to determine if someone has or does not have the antibodies they think they’re looking for; the interpretation of “HIV positive” is subjective and not consistent:

“At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.” (Abbott labs HIV-1/2 test, 1986 to the present).

They don’t produce singular or diagnostically specific results – they cross-react all over the map:

“Heterophile antibodies are a well-recognized cause of erroneous results in immunoassays. We describe here a 22-month-old child with heterophile antibodies reactive with bovine [Cow] serum albumin and caprine [Goat] proteins causing false-positive results to human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] type 1 and other infectious serology testing. (CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY IMMUNOLOGY, July 1999)

“False-positive ELISA test results can be caused by alloantibodies resulting from transfusions, transplantation, or pregnancy, autoimmune disorders, malignancies, alcoholic liver disease, or for reasons that are unclear.” (Doran, et al. False-Positive and Indeterminate Human Immunodeficiency Virus Test Results in Pregnant Women. Arch Family Medicine, 2000)

The secondary tests that are sometimes used to give a sense of validity to an initial test are either reformulations of the same material (the Western Blot), or are synthetic genetic probes (PCR Viral Load) that likewise cross-react and give no diagnostically specific reaction (and these tests are rarely to never used when you’re talking about “AIDS in Africa”):

“Persons at risk of HIV-1 infection have been classified incorrectly as HIV infected because of Western blot results, but the frequency of false-positive Western blot results is unknown.” (JAMA. 1998; 280: 1080-1085)

“The HIV-1 PCR assay was designed to monitor HIV therapy, not to diagnose HIV infection…In patients (like ours) with a low prior probability of disease, almost all positive test results are false positive.” (False Positive HIV Diagnosis b HIV-1 Plasma Viral Load Testing. Ann Intern Med, 1999.)

“Helminth (parasitic worm) “load“ is correlated to HIV plasma Viral Load, and successful deworming is associated with a significant decrease in HIV plasma Viral Load.” (Treatment of intestinal worms is associated with decreased HIV plasma viral load. J.AIDS, September, 2002)

AIDS in Africa is and has always been a clinical diagnosis. Essentially, the test is dispensed with and “AIDS” is diagnosed based on the symptoms of hunger, TB and malaria – in other words, poverty:

“Our attention is now focused on the considerably large number of the seronegative group (135/227, 59%) who were clinically diagnosed as having AIDS. All the patients had three major signs: weight loss, prolonged diarrhoea, and chronic fever. Many of them also had other AIDS-associated signs, such as lymphadenopathy, tuberculosis, dermatological diseases, and neurological disorders.” (Hishida O et al. Clinically diagnosed AIDS cases without evident association with HIV type 1 and 2 infections in Ghana Lancet. 1992 Oct 17).

The numbers that have been reported are also entirely fabricated based on exponential projections from one small group to entire populations. Very recently, these numbers have been revised to such a massive degree so as to drive the AIDS prognosticators to painful public redaction: In Swaziland this year, the rate of HIV infection among young women decreased remarkably, from 32.5 to 6 percent. A drop of 81% – overnight. UNICEF’s Swaziland representative, Dr. Alan Brody, told the press “The problems is that all the sero-surveillance data came from pregnant women, and estimates for other demographics was based on that.” (August, 2004, IRIN News)

Who are the tests considered “accurate” for? The tests are only considered to be “accurate” for certain groups. Those considered to be at “high risk” are much more likely to be tested, and to have their tests interpreted as either a “true positive,” or, as you can see below, a “false negative.” In other words, if they want you for the “AIDS” diagnosis, they’ll get you:

“Suppose, for example, a single rapid test that has 99.4% specificity is administered to 1,000 people, meaning six will test false-positive. That error rate won’t matter much in areas with a high prevalence of HIV, because in all probability the people testing false-positive will have the disease...

“But if the same test was performed on 1,000 white, affluent suburban housewives – a low-prevalence population – in all likelihood all positive results will be false, and positive predictive values plummet to zero. (Coming to Your Clinic – Candidates for Rapid Tests. AIDS Alert, 1998)

Here, from the Independent, is the new philosophy of AIDS, and it’s quite a shift: “Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognized that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.”

So how did we get to, “It’s only gay men, Africans, drug addicts and prostitutes,“ from the version advertised for 25 years: “Everyone is at equal risk to contract HIV and to develop AIDS.”

What happened to the theory of sexual transmission?

The 10-year 1997 study by Dr. Nancy Padian had a lot to do with its downfall. The study took 175 “mixed” heterosexual couples (that is, one partner testing “positive” and one “negative”) who practiced vaginal and anal sex [for the latter – 37.9% at the commencement of the study, decreasing to 8.1% by the end], both with and without condoms [32.2% condom use at the beginning, increasing to 74% at the end]. But no matter how these folks did it, nobody who was negative became positive:

“We followed up 175 HIV-discordant couples [one partner tests positive, one negative] over time, for a total of approximately 282 couple-years of follow up… No transmission [of HIV] occurred among the 25% of couples who did not use their condoms consistently, nor among the 47 couples who intermittently practiced unsafe sex during the entire duration of follow-up…We observed no seroconversions after entry into the study [nobody became HIV positive]…This evidence argues for low infectivity in the absence of either needle sharing and/or other cofactors.”“

Padian determined that outside of intravenous drug use, this was not a very transmissible “sexually-transmissible disease.” But there is a contention made by Dr. de Cock that some sort of special sexual activity in Sub-Saharan Africa must (but is not evidenced to) explain the differences in “HIV prevalence.” It’s worth looking at studies of sex and “HIV positivity” for comparison. Does sex correlate with “HIV positivity” more than I.V. drug addiction?

In West Africa, these women, all prostitutes, have remained negative for more than five years:

“[This study involved] a group of repeatedly exposed but persistently seronegative female prostitutes in The Gambia, West Africa…have worked as prostitutes for more than five years, use condoms infrequently with clients and only rarely with their regular partners and have a high incidence of other sexually transmitted diseases” (Rowland-Jones S et al. HIV-specific cytotoxic T-cells in HIV-exposed but uninfected Gambian women. Nat Med. 1995 Jan)

In sum, lots of STDs, lots of exposure to HIV positive persons, and no HIV.

Here, as reported on PBS’s “RX for Survival” (2005) a group of prostitutes refuses to get sick:

“In Nairobi, a group of prostitutes appear to have natural immunity against HIV…because they have an abnormally large number of killer T-cells.” (New York Times, 2005. Author: ANITA GATES)

In this study in Tel Aviv, girl and boy prostitutes don’t turn “positive,” unless they’re injection drug users:

“Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevalence was studied in an unselected group of 216 female and transsexual prostitutes … All 128 females who did not admit to drug abuse were seronegative; 2 of the 52 females (3.8%) who admitted to intravenous drug abuse were seropositive. “ (Modan B et al. Prevalence of HIV antibodies in transsexual and female prostitutes. Am J Public Health. 1992 Apr)

In Tijuana, among a group of hundreds of prostitutes, condoms were used by a slight majority, but then, they said, for less than half the time:

“In order to determine whether prostitutes operating outside of areas of high drug abuse have equally elevated rates of infection, 354 prostitutes were surveyed in Tijuana, Mexico… None of the 354 [blood] samples…was positive for HIV-1 or HIV-2. Condoms were used by 59% of prostitutes but for less than half of their sexual contacts. ... Infection with HIV was not found in this prostitute population despite the close proximity to neighboring San Diego, CA, which has a high incidence of diagnosed cases of AIDS, and to Los Angeles, which has a reported 4% prevalence of HIV infection in prostitutes.” (Hyams KC et al. HIV infection in a non-drug abusing prostitute population. Scand J Infect Dis. 1989)

No condoms, no drug use – zero positivity. The same is found in the US and throughout Europe. Injection drug use, not sex, equals “HIV positivity.”

“HIV infection in non-drug using prostitutes tends to be low or absent, implying that sexual activity does not place them at high risk, while prostitutes who use intravenous drugs are far more likely to be infected with HIV. Other prostitute studies tend to be small but similarly emphasize the central role of drug use as a major risk factor: in New York City, 50 per cent of 12 drug users were positive, compared with 7 per cent of 65 nonusers; in Italy, 59 per cent of 22 drug users were positive, whereas none of the nonusers were. None of the 50 prostitutes tested in London, 56 in Paris, or 399 in Nuremberg were seropositive.” (Rosenberg MJ, Weiner JM. Prostitutes and AIDS: a health department priority?. Am J Public Health. 1988 Apr)

That doesn’t sound like much of an STD.

So, do you still believe the WHO, and the medical authorities when they talk about AIDS? Despite their incredible, world-changing lies and deceptions, advertising campaigns and persecution of dissenting scientists, do you still believe them when they say that AIDS is still a sex-disease, but now, only if you’re Black, gay or poor?

Talk Radio Tackles AIDS with Professor Henry Bauer and Christine Maggiore

AM Talk Radio Host Jeff Farias invited Professor Emeritus of Chemistry and Science Studies and Dean Emeritus of Arts and Sciences at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Henry Bauer, and Alive & Well founder Christine Maggiore to chat about AIDS rethinking on his popular AM radio program last week.

Topics covered in the show include the racial bias in HIV testing, the real data on sexual transmission of HIV, the fact that so-called HIV tests have never been validated by purification of the virus from HIV positives, and that testing HIV positive does not signify infection with HIV.

Listen to the broadcast minus commercial interruption by clicking here: www.rethinkingaids.com

The Failure of HIV Testing to Explain AIDS and Racial Bias in Results

Professor Henry Bauer offers surprising facts about HIV and HIV testing that couldn’t make it into the radio broadcast:

My studies complement what Christine point out on the radio. I've analyzed the accumulated data from so-called HIV tests and have shown that what these tests detect is not something infectious, because the prevalence of it—the rate at which people test positive—has not changed during a quarter of a century, whereas infections, epidemics, show increases followed by decreases.

"HIV" varies in a regular fashion with age, race, sex, and geography whereas infectious agents do not discriminate in this way by race, and they strike in different geographic regions at different times. Globally, "HIV" has remained restricted largely to southern Africa and the Caribbean. In developed countries, it has remained restricted largely to people with TB, drug addicts, and groups of gay men.

Careful analysis of a multitude of studies show:

• There is no correlation geographically between "HIV" and AIDS.
• There is no correlation between "HIV" and AIDS over time.
• There is no correlation between "HIV" and AIDS in their relative impacts on women and on men.
• There is no correlation between "HIV" and AIDS in their relative impacts on white and black people.

And when two things are not correlated, one cannot be the prime cause of the other.

As Christine has pointed out, the criteria for a positive “HIV test” vary from lab to lab and country to country, but there is no disease for which tests in different locations deliver different verdicts.

One of the central tenets of HIV/AIDS theory is that following “HIV infection,” there is an asymptomatic latent period, lasting on average 10 years, before any symptoms of illness appear. Yet all the HIV-test data show that the greatest risk for testing positive is among adults of around 40 years of age, while the data for deaths in the United States show that the highest rates of death from "HIV disease" are also among adults of around 40 years of age. This means there is no latent period.

Furthermore, no infectious disease kills people aged around 40 while sparing the very young and the old; infectious diseases are most dangerous for babies and seniors. "HIV disease" is obviously not an infectious disease.

AZT, the first antiretroviral drug approved to treat AIDS, was introduced in 1987. Later it was also used also for prophylaxis against AIDS (given to asymptomatic HIV positive testing people). In the mid-1990s, combination therapy or HAART (Highly Active AntiRetroviral Treatment) was introduced, and immediately described as "life-saving." Because of HAART, it is said that AIDS is no longer fatal, it’s described instead as a chronic, manageable condition. If that is the case, then the ages at which HIV positive testing people die should have increased steadily since 1987, particularly after the mid-1990s when HAART was introduced. However, death statistics show that the age at which the risk of dying is greatest has remained at around age 40 from 1987 until at least 2004 (the last year for which such data appears to be available). In other words, there is no sign of any life-extending effect of antiretroviral treatment.

Instead, it has become increasingly clear that antiretroviral treatment harms, rather than helps when used as directed. The latest version of the official US guidelines for administering anti-HIV drugs states:

"In the era of combination antiretroviral therapy, several large observational studies have indicated that the risk of several non-AIDS-defining conditions, including cardiovascular diseases, liver-related events, renal disease, and certain non-AIDS malignancies is greater than the risk for AIDS in persons with CD4 T-cell counts >200 cells/mm3; the risk for these events increases progressively as the CD4 T-cell count decreases from 350 to 200 cells/mm3."

In other words, more HIV positive testing people are dying from liver, heart, and kidney failure which are typical effects of AIDS drugs than are dying from AIDS illnesses.

The mistaken view that testing positive for "HIV" denotes fatal infection by a virus has led to the unnecessary, iatrogenic, deaths of innumerable people because of drugs that were known from the very beginning to be highly toxic. These unnecessary deaths will continue as long as this mistake is not corrected. Those people who characteristically tend to test

HIV positive most frequently are under the greatest danger: Africans, African-Americans, and people of African ancestry in other parts of the world.

There is a profound racial bias in the tendency to test HIV positive. In the USA, the latest figures are that black men test positive 7 times as often as white men, and black women 21 times as often as white women. Similar racial disparities are reported from Europe and from South Africa.

Under the HIV/AIDS dogma, this must come about because of the particular sexual behavior of black people. That behavior, according to James Chin, former epidemiologist for the World Health Organization, is that 20% to 40% of the adult population in sub-Saharan Africa participates in "multiple concurrent overlapping" sexual relationships: intercourse with several people over the space of a few weeks, and changing partners every few weeks.

Now that "HIV/AIDS" in the USA is acknowledged as a problem primarily for black communities, analogous sexual behavior is alleged for them.

On the other hand, no actual observations or studies have found any marked difference in sexual behavior between black people and others. The willingness to believe in this "otherness" of Africans and African-Americans in this respect reflects long-held---even if suppressed or subconscious---racist prejudices.

The tendency to test positive varies by race because of differences in immune response. Asian Americans always test positive 30-60% less frequently than white Americans. Native Americans test positive not much more often than white Americans. Hispanics on the west coast, who are largely of Native American stock, test positive not much more often than white west coasters, but Hispanics on the east coast, who are largely of Caribbean-African stock, test positive nearly as often as African Americans. In South Africa, "coloreds" test positive at rates between those of black and white South Africans.

All the data on racial differences in testing HIV positive demonstrate that testing positive does not reflect an infection, and indicting black people for this difference reveals deep-seated if unacknowledged racist stereotypes.

“How Positive Are You?”
New AIDS Rethinking Podcast Debuts

Christine Maggiore and David Crowe launched a new podcast program that reports the other side of AIDS news. You can listen to the first episode, essentially a test run, at iTunes (phobos.apple.com) or through either of the below links:

aras.ab.ca

feed://aras.ab.ca

Duesberg Debate on Radio

On May 23, Professor Peter Duesberg of UC Berkeley debated Len Horowitz, an AIDS conspiracy theorists who believes HIV is a man-made virus created by the US government, on the George Whithurst Berry show. The discussion includes the origin of HIV (natural or a bio-weapon), whether it has a role in AIDS, and the part that drugs like AZT play in the development of disease. Listen up at the link below:

aras.ab.ca/audio

Duesberg in Conversation with Robert Scott Bell

Those interested in a friendly discussion of the facts according to Dr. Duesberg will enjoy the following interview with Talk Radio Network host Robert Scott Bell:

www.switchpod.com

Here’s more from Duesberg and RS Bell in the form of an internet podcast:

www.switchpod.com

Daily New Analysis of India Asks the Big Question, Quotes Big Names in AIDS Rethinking

The below article appeared last week as a full page, full color article in DNA, a national Indian newspaper:

Is HIV the cause of AIDS?

The failure of a much sought-after vaccine against the virus has re-ignited an old debate. Mayank Tiwari explores the spectacular science controversy.

Last September, AIDS researchers were dealt a heavy blow when clinical trials of the most promising candidate for an HIV vaccine were stopped after it turned out to be a dud. The clinical trials showed that the vaccine might have put the people who received it at greater risk of infection rather than preventing HIV or reducing its effect. A survey of top AIDS scientists conducted by The Independent showed most believed a vaccine was nowhere near, with some even believing that effective immunization against HIV may never be possible.

“Nearly a billion dollars is spent globally on AIDS research annually, and yet the sobering reality is that at present there are no promising candidates for an HIV vaccine,” wrote Harvard Medical School’s Bruce Walker in the journal Science, summing up the failure of the expensive effort.

The development has strengthened the position of a vocal minority of scientists who argue that HIV is a harmless passenger virus (found in diseased tissue, but not contributing to the cause of the disease).

This community of scientists includes Peter Duesberg, professor of molecular and cell biology at the University of California, Berkeley, David Rasnick, a prominent American biochemist, and Nobel laureate Kary Mullis, another American biochemist, and enjoys the support of South African President Thabo Mbeki. They have from the very beginning of the AIDS era—supposed to be 1984 when US biomedical researcher Robert Gallo published a series of papers arguing that HIV was the cause of AIDS—questioned the “causal link” between the virus and the disease.

Other developments, too, have strengthened the position of the AIDS dissidents. Among these are: periodic revisions of the number of people suffering from AIDS; the demographic factor, which is against the nature of infectious viruses to spread regardless of identity clusters; and AIDS symptoms like tuberculosis and cancer being common results of lifestyle conditions. Duesberg even says that it is AIDS drugs, such as AZT, that cause the disease owing to their high toxicity. The dissenters also cite data showing HIV+ individuals tend to get AIDS when they take AZT and get better if they stop taking the drug.

Among the main reasons dissenters cite in favour of their movement is skewed health funding, especially in developing countries. On May 10, the British Medical Journal carried an article calling for UNAIDS to be shut down as it distorts health funding. In it, Roger England, who heads a Grenada-based think tank, Health Systems Workshop, argued that too much is being spent on HIV compared to other diseases which kill more people. “It is no longer heresy to point out that far too much is spent on HIV relative to other needs and that this is damaging health systems. Although HIV causes 3.7% of mortality, it receives 25% of international healthcare aid and a big chunk of domestic expenditure. HIV aid often exceeds total domestic health budgets themselves.”

Purushottam Muloli, a New Delhi-based member of Rethinking AIDS, a loose group of scientists and policy makers who do not agree with the prevalent HIV/AIDS theory, says he has been questioning the Indian health ministry and UNAIDS about the scientific evidence behind labeling sections of the population, such as homosexuals, high-risk groups. “The health policy of the country is being controlled by international donors. Can you believe that the entire health budget of India is less than the amount of international funding the country receives on HIV?”

Rethinking AIDS president David Crowe says the AIDS “dogma” persists because doctors are trained to obey their superiors. “There are many examples of bad medical advice becoming dogma due to the power of senior medical people. The dogma of AIDS has resulted in hopelessness and despair caused by the stigma of HIV positive status. ”

Call for End to UNAIDS in British Medical Journal

"Why a UN agency for HIV and not for pneumonia or diabetes, which both kill more people? UNAIDS mandate is wrong and harmful."

Writing in the May 2008 British Medical Journal, health management expert Roger England asserts that the joint United Nations program on HIV and AIDS should be "closed down rapidly." England is chairman of Health Systems Workshop, an independent advisory group on health management in poor countries. According to England,"UNAIDS should be disbanded as its mandate is wrong and harmful."

Launched in 1996, UNAIDS is based in Switzerland and works in more than 80 countries worldwide against the alleged spread of HIV and AIDS. England says the UNAIDS agency was set up on the argument that "AIDS and its impact are exceptional" and need more attention, effort and funding than all other health threats faced by the world today.

England says AIDS is "a major problem in southern Africa, but it is not a global catastrophe." He also asserts that language from a top UNAIDS official that describes AIDS as "one of the make-or-break forces of this century ... a potential threat to the survival and well-being of people worldwide," is "sensationalist."

"Worldwide," he states, "the number of deaths from HIV each year is about the same as that among children aged under five years in India."

England argues that "far too much is spent on HIV relative to other needs and that this is damaging health systems. HIV causes 3.7% of global mortality but receives 25% international healthcare aid and a big chunk of domestic expenditure."

"HIV exceptionalism is dead," he says, "and the writing is on the wall for UNAIDS. Why a UN agency for AIDS and not for pneumonia or diabetes, which both kill more people?"

"UNAIDS should be closed down rapidly, not because it has performed badly given its mandate, but because its mandate is wrong and harmful. Its technical functions should be refitted into [the World Health Organization], to be balanced with those for other diseases."

Source: www.inthenews.co.uk

AIDS Maverick Peter Duesberg Profiled in Discover Magazine

The June 2008 issue of Discover, currently available on newsstands, features a lengthy, sympathetic and very interesting profile of University of California at Berkeley professor Peter Duesberg, an expert in retroviruses and the first scientist to openly question the role of HIV in AIDS causation in a paper published in the medical journal "Cancer Research" in 1987.

Summarizing the original reason for Duesberg's skepticism of the HIV hypothesis, Discover says, "He knew that HIV is a retrovirus --- the subject of his own heralded research --- and that retroviruses don't kill the host cells they infect. If anything, the make them proliferate. That is the opposite of what happens with AIDS where special immune cells are knocked off. The more Duesberg looked for answers, the more he came to believe that the original hypothesis of top AIDS researchers --- that, at least in the US, AIDS was brought on by drug use and other immune suppressing causes --- was correct...By 1986, after more than two years of research, Duesberg was so convinced that the HIV theory was dead wrong that he spent nine months writing his paper on HIV for Cancer Research."

The article poses bold questions, "Could it be, as Duesberg suggests, that the antiretroviral drugs used to attack HIV actually do more harm than good, contrary to the common assumption that they have dramatically reduced AIDS deaths?" and includes a summary of his alternative hypothesis of AIDS causation along with an update on his innovative cancer research.

Anticipating that AIDS activists will attack author Jeanne Lenzer and Discover for daring to give coverage and credibility to Dr. Duesberg and the AIDS debate, please consider taking a stand for open dialogue by sending a supportive email to the magazine at editorial@discovermagazine.com

Skeptical Scientist and Whistle Blowing Journalist Honored for Exposing AIDS Fraud

Rethinking AIDS, an international group of more than 2,500 scientists, doctors, journalists, health advocates and others, announced that a prominent research scientist and a well-known AIDS journalist will accept "Clean Hands" awards as part of events on May 13-14 in Washington, D.C. The awards, given by the Alliance for Patient Safety and Semmelweis Society International, recognize public health "whistleblowers" -- in their case, for their work in exposing fraud in AIDS research.

University of California at Berkeley microbiologist Peter Duesberg, Ph.D. (a board member of RA) and journalist Celia Farber will be two of 19 individuals to accept the awards at a ceremony Tuesday, May 13, at the Library of Congress in Washington (see event details below). On Wednesday, May 14, Dr. Duesberg and Ms. Farber will testify before a "No FEAR Tribunal" to inform members of Congress and the public of the dangers to all when whistleblowers are silenced.

The awards are presented as part of the second annual "Whistleblower Week in Washington." Whistleblower Week is sponsored by a coalition of organizations led by the No FEAR Institute, a group supporting government employees seeking fair treatment and employment protection for those who expose corruption. Since May 2002, when the federal No FEAR Act (Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act) passed, the Institute has sought even stronger guarantees for whistleblowers.

These historic events honor those taking a stand for integrity and courage in public affairs and the abuses of the public trust endemic to AIDS research.

EVENT SCHEDULE: (No reserved admission; arrive early)

Presentation of "Clean Hands" Awards, Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Members' Room, Thomas Jefferson Building, The Library of Congress, First Street S.E., between Independence Avenue and East Capitol Street, Washington

Screening of film "The Constant Gardener", Introduction by Peter Duesberg and Celia Farber; discussion following, Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., Location to be announced

"No FEAR Tribunal", Wednesday, May 14, 2008, , 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. - House of Representatives Testimony, Room 2200, Rayburn House Office Building, Independence Avenue, South Capitol Street, First Street, and C Street S.W., Washington, , 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. - Senate Testimony, Room 215, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Constitution Avenue, C Street, First Street, and Second Street N.E., Washington

MEDIA CONTACTS:

David Crowe, President, Calgary , Alberta , Canada (Mountain time zone), 1-403-289-6609 (office), 1-403-861-2225 (mobile), david.crowe@aras.ab.ca

Elizabeth Ely, Public Relations Chairperson, Brooklyn, N.Y., U.S. (Eastern time zone), 1-718-704-9672 (mobile), publicrelations@rethinkingaids.com

Rethinking AIDS: The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis ("RA" or "the Group") was formed in 1991 to express the concerns of a growing number of renowned scientists and medical doctors about HIV research and the resulting human rights abuses. In 1995, by a letter published in Science, the Group called for a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against the HIV/AIDS hypothesis and recommended that critical epidemiological studies be undertaken., , Among RA's founders and key members are University of Toronto professor emeritus and former cancer researcher Dr. Etienne de Harven; Harvard microbiologist Dr. Charles Thomas; 1993 Nobel laureate for chemistry Dr. Kary Mullis; Nature/Biotechnology co-founder Dr. Harvey Bialy; University of California at Berkeley molecular biologist Dr. Peter Duesberg and the late Yale mathematician Dr. Serge Lang, both members of the National Academy of Sciences; professor of medical physics at the Royal Perth Hospital in Western Australia Dr. Eleni Papadopulos; and Glasgow University professor emeritus of public health and World Health Organization consultant Dr. Gordon Stewart.

Alive & Well is back in operation after an extensive IRS audit involving a five year review of our fiscal records, board meeting notes, newsletters, meeting agendas and educational materials. We are happy to report having passed this inspection with flying colors and to let you know that our non-profit status is officially reconfirmed.

We will resume posting news on a quarterly basis beginning in May. In the meantime, please visit the following web sites for current news and information:

• Rethinking AIDS
  
• Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society
  
• News from Not AIDS
  

• $2.5 Million Award Over False HIV Positive
• Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Questions AIDS
• HIV Positive Journalist Speaks Out After Stopping Meds
• Pope Calls for Food to Fight AIDS
• The Other Side of World AIDS Day

False Positive Woman Wins $2.5 Million Victory, Story Gains International Attention

A lawsuit involving a false positive HIV diagnosis ended in a legal and moral victory for Audrey Serrano who suffered multiple ailments and permanent physical damage from the anti-HIV drug treatments her doctor ordered despite Serrano’s persistent questions about her diagnosis. Nine years after her original positive diagnosis, follow up testing proved Serrano was HIV negative.

The case is the first lawsuit in US history involving a false positive HIV diagnosis not to settle quietly out of court without public disclosure of the facts. Instead, since original reports on Serrano’s trial began appearing on the AP wire service earlier this month, the case has been making international news.

Below please find an AP report filed prior to the verdict and a follow up story from Indy Media that gives details about the case that raise serious questions about the accuracy and reliability of so-called HIV tests.

A fact worth noting in the AP report to anyone who believes low T cell counts happened only to those testing positive: The HIV negative Serrano had counts low enough to put her in the AIDS category. As her doctor stated, “I believed she had HIV from…the fact that her blood had abnormal amounts of cells used to fight infections.”

Another piece of information brought up in news reports that conflicts with mainstream claims about HIV transmission: Serrano tests negative despite having had a partner diagnosed with AIDS.

Hearing Resumes in HIV Misdiagnosis Suit
By Rodrique Ngowi, December 5, 2007

WORCESTER, Mass. (AP) — Audrey Serrano received HIV treatments for almost nine years before receiving a stunning diagnosis: She never actually had the virus that causes AIDS.

Now Serrano is suing a doctor who treated her, saying the powerful combination of drugs she took triggered a string of ailments, including depression, chronic fatigue, loss of weight and appetite and inflammation of the intestine.

"Today, it's still hard. One minute you think you have it, the next minute you don't," Serrano, the divorced mother of a 17-year-old girl, said Tuesday during a break in proceedings at Worcester Superior Court. "And your mind plays tricks on you, and you still live as if you have HIV, even though you don't."

Serrano, 45, is seeking unspecified damages in the lawsuit she filed in 2003. The original lawsuit named several medical providers but was amended to include just Dr. Kwan Lai, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center in Worcester's HIV clinic.

Serrano's ordeal began in 1994 after an anonymous test at a clinic in Fitchburg showed that she was HIV positive. Serrano and her attorney, David Angueira, say they are unsure whether the initial test was a false positive, or if it was a record mix-up.

A doctor at the clinic in Fitchburg put Serrano on medication intended to contain the virus without conducting separate tests to confirm the diagnosis, said Angueira.

Serrano was referred to the clinic in Worcester, where Lai began treating her, the attorney said. Lai repeatedly failed to order definitive tests even after efforts to monitor how Serrano was responding to treatment did not show the presence of HIV in her blood, Angueira said.

Lai testified Tuesday that she had no reason to question Serrano's original diagnosis because Serrano convinced her she had the virus that causes AIDS.

"She convinced me that she was HIV (positive)," Lai told the court, saying Serrano told her that she had worked as a prostitute, her partner also had AIDS and that she had suffered three bouts of a type of pneumonia that was typically associated with those infected by the virus.

"I have never been a prostitute or a hooker, I've got too much respect for myself for that," Serrano said after the proceedings. She confirmed that her former boyfriend indeed tested positive for HIV/AIDS, but disputed the claim that she told the doctor that she had suffered bouts of Pneumocystis pneumonia.

"I believed she had HIV from the detailed history we took" and the fact that her blood had abnormal amounts of cells used to fight infections, Lai said.

Under cross examination, Lai said she never saw a document that proved conclusively that Serrano was HIV positive. Serrano refused to permit her to contact her former physician directly for more information and never signed a form that would allow other doctors to release medical records to her, Lai said.

Lai and her attorney, Joannie Gulliford Hoban, declined to comment outside the courtroom. The medical center has denied wrongdoing in the case. The hearing started Monday and is expected to conclude next week.

Verdict of $2.5 Million Over False-Positive HIV Diagnosis Brings up Basic
Problems With AIDS Testing and Treatment, Say Scientists
Worcester.IndyMedia.org

CHICAGO, Dec. 12, 2007--A lawsuit decided today against a medical doctor at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center over consequences of an allegedly false-positive HIV antibody test exposes basic problems with the test and treatments for all persons taking them, according to a high-ranking medical researcher who has advised the plaintiff's lawyer on the case. The verdict, issued today, awarded $2.5 million to the plaintiff.

The complaint by Audrey Serrano, 45, in court hearings this week in Worcester, Mass., focuses on the absence of a “confirmatory” Western Blot test in her records. However, Andrew Maniotis, Ph.D., research assistant professor in the Department of Pathology, University of Illinois-Chicago School of Medicine, contends that, though the reliability of all HIV testing is not on trial in court here, the case history opens questions about it. And, because Serrano developed illnesses commonly defined as “AIDS-related conditions” only after taking HIV medications known as “highly active antiretroviral therapy” (HAART), the drugs themselves appear to have caused “AIDS.”

Rethinking AIDS (RA) has been asking such questions since its founding in 1991. Etienne de Harven, M.D., president of RA, says, “It is urgent that we open a public debate on the highly suspect reliability of all HIV testing. Moreover, I fully share Dr. Maniotis' concern about the safety of HIV drugs.” Further resources are online at the group’s Web site, www.rethinkingaids.com.

Rodney Richards, Ph.D., worked on the development of antibody (ELISA) and genetic “viral load” tests for Amgen and holds some related patents. “The diagnosis of being HIV positive is based on arbitrary combinations of tests, none of which are approved for diagnosing HIV,” he says. “In fact there is no test for HIV. It’s just an illusion.”

Raising issues of informed consent for all persons submitting to HIV antibody testing, the test kits themselves contain disclaimers that doctors rarely, if ever, share with patients. For example, Abbott Laboratories’ ELISA test kit, typically used as a preliminary test, warns:

“ELISA testing alone cannot be used to diagnose AIDS.”

Confirmation of an ELISA result with a Western Blot test is currently required as a “standard of care.”

Epitope’s Western Blot package insert reads: “Do not use this kit as the sole basis for HIV infection.”

“This is somewhat more concerning, since the Western Blot is supposed to be a highly accurate test, used to confirm that an ELISA is not a false positive,” says Dr. Maniotis. “Moreover, the peer-reviewed literature gives substantial evidence that the virus ‘HIV’ has never been isolated in purified form free of contaminating cellular debris in order to generate the so-called ‘specific viral antigens’ used in the test kits.”

Serrano, now acknowledged to have always tested HIV negative and therefore not to have been at risk for developing AIDS, nevertheless suffered from several AIDS-defining illnesses, including wasting, herpes, and oral thrush, while taking HAART. She also suffered from other health problems, including constant diarrhea (AIDS-defining under the African definition), muscle wasting, profound fatigue, non-specific skin lesions, oral thrush, herpes outbreaks, severe nosebleeds, constant gynecological bleeding and pain from ovarian cysts, fibrocystic breast lesions, hyperplastic pituitary lesions, and severe heart and respiratory difficulties.

Labels for HAART drugs actually list these conditions as possible side effects, suggesting that the drugs themselves cause AIDS-related conditions, Maniotis says.

Serrano’s experience is, sadly, not unique. Dr. Maniotis chose to investigate her case because, he says, “it is typical of many cases reviewed and, as it illustrates so clearly the development of AIDS-related conditions in a woman testing HIV negative who was healthy before she took HAART, strongly suggests that profound paradigm shifts are urgently needed to avoid more human rights violations.”

Questioning HIV/AIDS: Morally Reprehensible or Scientifically Warranted? is the title of a new article by Henry Bauer, PhD, published this month in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (Winter 2007, Volume 12, Number 4). Click here to download the article in PDF format.

Maria Papagiannidou is a well known Greek journalist. What was not known was that for 12 years she was hiding the fact that she was HIV-positive, suffering greatly from drug-induced side effects. Recently she rejected the HIV=AIDS paradigm and has stopped all AIDS drugs, and has regained her health -- her AIDS-defining illnesses which only started with the drugs, have now ceased.

Maria is also recently married to the Canadian AIDS dissident and peace activist Gilles St-Pierre (http://peaceandlove.ca) who discovered her through her website, http://hivwave.gr (parts in English).

In a Google video she is interviewed on Greek Channel ET3 in Greek with English subtitles by Vassilis Vasilikos who is described by wikipedia as a "prolific Greek writer and diplomat.” See the interview at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5241692678156821662

Maria is the author of "How I Conquered AIDS: A wonderful adventure with the HIV virus" which was written under a pseudonym before she revealed her HIV status and "The Game of Love in the time of AIDS. Both books were written before she became a full AIDS dissident. She is now planning a third book to describe her new views and their impact on people labelled HIV-positive.

Some quotes from Maria in the video:

"[After stopping the drugs] I now feel like the sleeping beauty who was awakened with a kiss…I have been an AIDS patient, had developed full AIDS...a series of illnesses...which came over me since I started the AIDS therapy...I have suffered encephalopathy, it was due to a cocktail of drugs…Things [the drugs] cause, they attribute to the virus."

And some comments from Vassili in reply to her statements:

"It sounds like a conspiracy among the big pharma…As I understand from your books, there is a growing group of people who question AIDS…"

In a story carried across the AP wire on World AIDS Day under the title “Pope Calls for New Efforts to Fight AIDS,” the top man at the Vatican echoes the cries of poor Africans across the continent who say food is their number one need over AIDS drugs, condoms and safe sex education in the fight against AIDS.

"Food is often cited by people living with and affected by HIV/AIDS as their greatest and most important need," said Elizabeth Mataka, the U.N.'s special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa.

Other quotes of interest from the article: “A U.N. food agency said that reducing hunger in poor countries was key to fighting AIDS and other infectious diseases. Hunger and disease create a vicious cycle, as famished people are more likely to fall victim to infectious and chronic diseases, which then reduce their ability to provide food for themselves and their family, the Rome-based World Food Program said in a report.”

“Malnutrition also makes recovery more difficult even when proper drugs are available, so the international community must take care to couple medical help with food aid, the agency said in its World Hunger Series report for 2007.”

“We need to start questioning the establishment, and look for the other side of this and other issues. We need to take charge of our health, and not look to the ‘authorities’ for all the answers…”

December 1st marks World AIDS Day. To show their support for the cause and to remember those who have died, people don the customary red ribbon, and attend a number of charity fundraisers, raising money for AIDS research and treatment programs, with the possibility of meeting a celebrity or two. On the guest list? Leading AIDS crusader, Bono and his Product Red consorts, the shining faces of pop culture and their children. We can’t give Bono all the credit. Celebrities have been endorsing the fight-against-AIDS initiatives since the late Princess Diana sat on the bedside of a dying AIDS patient and held his hand.

Today, the AIDS cause is a multi-billion dollar industry with funds going into the research, manufacturing and distribution of AIDS drugs, celebrity endorsements, marketing and advertising, the promotion and sale of condoms, edutainment events, world-wide conferences, and more. With so much money flowing, mostly into the coffers of drug companies, AIDS has now become a disease to be maintained, not cured.

But rather go on about the evils of AIDS, Inc., I’m going to write about my personal journey into the heart of the current AIDS debate. About two and a half years ago, I auditioned for a role in an original rock opera. The open call ad had a Lennon-ish air to it, and I thought this might be my chance to redeem myself in light of all my other failed attempts at attaining my fifteen minutes of fame. What can I say? The audition was hideous at best, and I had no inclination to cling onto even the slightest bit of hope. Imagine my surprise when I received a call from the writer himself offering me a part. I thought the gods must really be crazy, but I thanked them for the small mercies they send us ‘little’ people every now and then.

To make a long story short, we performed the first act of the rock opera as a workshop in Vancouver. Svend Robinson and Libby Davies attended the closing night. The electrifying show was still pulsating as guests mingled, scanning the information tables bedecked with glossy-paged reading material on HIV and AIDS. The story itself was an autobiographical account of how the writer contracted hiv through a non-consensual relationship with a trusted and much older mentor. The first act reveals the nature of their relationship, and the subsequent discovery by the writer of his positive status. While the first act appears to support the prevailing belief that hiv causes AIDS, a look into the full story reveals that the writer was actually challenging this belief.

I hadn’t realized the weight of the issue until a friendship developed between myself and the writer. I gained more insight about hiv and AIDS through talking to him about his experience and doing my own research into the area. Having lost a close relative from AIDS in the 80s and not really understanding the condition at the time, my curiosity grew. I discovered that Robert Gallo, the researcher who identified hiv as the cause of AIDS in 1984 (much to the chagrin of a group of French scientists challenging his copyright), published his findings without any solid evidence to back his claims. The U.S. government was very quick to stand up and tell the rest of the world that the cause of AIDS had been found, a victory over the French. There is a lot of information at the public’s disposal supporting the ‘dissident’ view that hiv does not cause AIDS, that AIDS, a conglomeration of various illnesses, is just that, many different unrelated illnesses that might have something in common, a weakened immune system, caused by an extremely tiny virus that has never been isolated, its identification and measurement defying scientific method. Or from many factors - chemo-therapy AIDS drugs, street drugs, to famine, dirty water, malaria, and the no-cebo (placebo backwards) effect. The documentary film “The Other Side of AIDS” by Robin Scovill, made in 2004, further reveals the inaccuracy of hiv testing, the life-threatening effects of AIDS drugs, and the untold suffering of millions caused by the labeling of hiv as a killer virus. Through a series of interviews with research scientists, medical professionals, activists, and victims of the label, a lot of what we believe to be true about hiv and AIDS because the medical establishment and the government say so is perhaps a well-thought out plan of action to keep the greenbacks rolling and the billion-dollar pharmaceutical industry moving.

The tragedy in this would make Shakespeare’s “Macbeth” look like a romantic-comedy. What is the tragedy? The tragedy is that millions of people are being tested for a condition that might not exist. Those who are labeled are told they don’t have long to live unless they take the drugs. They are then ostracized from their communities, and in some parts of the world like Papua New Guinea, even buried alive. Furthermore, by revealing their ‘condition’ to others, they are denied the very thing we need the most, love. True, they might get our charity through a cheque and a hug, but how about the real, touchy feely, real kind of love?

Back to my writer friend. He was told that without the drugs, he’d have five years to live, and with the drugs, possibly ten. After experiencing damaging side effects, he stopped taking the drugs. He’s still going strong to this day due to the strength of his will and belief that hiv does not equal death, eleven years later. There are many people with the label who have been living long, healthy lives.

Of course, then there’s the ‘recent’ popular idea that what we think matters being given greater focus with scientists, writers, filmmakers, shamans and even ordinary people supporting the view that we have the power to shape our reality.

We need to start questioning the establishment, step outside of our boxes, and look for the other side of this and other issues. We need to take charge of our health, and not look to the ‘authorities’ for all the answers. We’ve given up so much control, not only to clipboard-toting doctors who have a pill for every ailment imaginable, to politicians preaching why we need ‘them’ to protect ‘us’ – but to the glamorous deities of pop stardom who wear red ribbons like chic Gucci accessories, to government programs that take babies away from their mothers when they refuse AIDS drug treatments, and to the courts of law that put everyday people behind bars simply because they lied to hide a lie.

HIV is not the real threat. It is our willingness to give up our power, the power to think, the power to seek answers, the power to question. That is the greatest threat to our survival today, and we see the consequences of giving up that power. The myth of hiv is just another example of how easily we can be duped and how easily fear is spread. The War on Terror. It’s no coincidence that the communities affected by these dubious constructs are those that have already been persecuted, shunned, and bullied: blacks, gays, the homeless, and Arabs. Of course, it affects us all if we continue to look at the world as if we’re the only ones that matter.

I have joined forces with my writer friend, and together we will be performing all three acts of his rock opera as a two-person show in Toronto to coincide with World AIDS Day. The production is part of a double bill dubbed “The Other Side of World AIDS Day”. Excerpts from Scovill’s film will be shown. We hope people will step outside of their boxes on that day and join us in word and song to celebrate the re-awakening of our collective consciousness. No red ribbons necessary. For more information, visit: www.southerntime.ca

Copyright © Shazia Islam 2007. All Rights Reserved.

• Global Estimates of AIDS Slashed by Millions
• Top UK Medical Expert Calls AIDS “Epidemic That Never Was”
• Conservative Radio Star Rush Limbaugh Questions AIDS
• President Thabo Mbeki: Still an AIDS Skeptic
• Mises Institute Joins AIDS Debate

UNAIDS Admits to a Decade of Exaggerated Numbers

On the eve of World AIDS Day, popular claims about AIDS came under scrutiny once again in the global media. On November 20, the Washington Post revealed that UN AIDS planned to admit it has “long overestimated both the size and course of the epidemic,” reporting constant increases when evidence showed the opposite was true.

A multitude of news stories followed UNAIDS’ admission of inflated figures, but as Dr. Henry Bauer points out in the commentary following the Post article, “media coverage failed to report clearly that the UN AIDS revision was only of statistically calculated estimates, not of the actual situation those numbers pretend to describe.”

U.N. to Cut Estimate Of AIDS Epidemic
Population With Virus Overstated by Millions
by Craig Timberg, Washington Post, November 20, 2007

JOHANNESBURG-- The United Nations' top AIDS scientists plan to acknowledge this week that they have long overestimated both the size and the course of the epidemic, which they now believe has been slowing for nearly a decade, according to U.N. documents prepared for the announcement.

AIDS remains a devastating public health crisis in the most heavily affected areas of sub-Saharan Africa. But the far-reaching revisions amount to at least a partial acknowledgment of criticisms long leveled by outside researchers who disputed the U.N. portrayal of an ever-expanding global epidemic.

The latest estimates, due to be released publicly Tuesday, put the number of annual new HIV infections at 2.5 million, a cut of more than 40 percent from last year's estimate, documents show. The worldwide total of people infected with HIV -- estimated a year ago at nearly 40 million and rising -- now will be reported as 33 million.

Having millions fewer people with a lethal contagious disease is good news. Some researchers, however, contend that persistent overestimates in the widely quoted U.N. reports have long skewed funding decisions and obscured potential lessons about how to slow the spread of HIV. Critics have also said that U.N. officials overstated the extent of the epidemic to help gather political and financial support for combating AIDS.

"There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda," said Helen Epstein, author of "The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS." "I hope these new numbers will help refocus the response in a more pragmatic way."

Annemarie Hou, spokeswoman for the U.N. AIDS agency, speaking from Geneva, declined to comment on the grounds that the report had not been released publicly. In documents obtained by The Washington Post, U.N. officials say the revisions stemmed mainly from better measurements rather than fundamental shifts in the epidemic. They also say they are continually seeking to improve their tracking of AIDS with the latest available tools.

Among the reasons for the overestimate is methodology; U.N. officials traditionally based their national HIV estimates on infection rates among pregnant women receiving prenatal care. As a group, such women were younger, more urban, wealthier and likely to be more sexually active than populations as a whole, according to recent studies.

The United Nations' AIDS agency, known as UNAIDS and led by Belgian scientist Peter Piot since its founding in 1995, has been a major advocate for increasing spending to combat the epidemic. Over the past decade, global spending on AIDS has grown by a factor of 30, reaching as much as $10 billion a year.

But in its role in tracking the spread of the epidemic and recommending strategies to combat it, UNAIDS has drawn criticism in recent years from Epstein and others who have accused it of being politicized and not scientifically rigorous.

For years, UNAIDS reports have portrayed an epidemic that threatened to burst beyond its epicenter in southern Africa to generate widespread illness and death in other countries. In China alone, one report warned, there would be 10 million infections -- up from 1 million in 2002 -- by the end of the decade.

Piot often wrote personal prefaces to those reports warning of the dangers of inaction, saying in 2006 that "the pandemic and its toll are outstripping the worst predictions."

But by then, several years' worth of newer, more accurate studies already offered substantial evidence that the agency's tools for measuring and predicting the course of the epidemic were flawed.

Newer studies commissioned by governments and relying on random, census-style sampling techniques found consistently lower infection rates in dozens of countries. For example, the United Nations has cut its estimate of HIV cases in India by more than half because of a study completed this year. This week's report also includes major cuts to U.N. estimates for Nigeria, Mozambique and Zimbabwe.

The revisions affect not just current numbers but past ones as well. A UNAIDS report from December 2002, for example, put the total number of HIV cases at 42 million. The real number at that time was 30 million, the new report says.

The downward revisions also affect estimated numbers of orphans, AIDS deaths and patients in need of costly antiretroviral drugs -- all major factors in setting funding levels for the world's response to the epidemic.

James Chin, a former World Health Organization AIDS expert who has long been critical of UNAIDS, said that even these revisions may not go far enough. He estimated the number of cases worldwide at 25 million.

"If they're coming out with 33 million, they're getting closer. It's a little high, but it's not outrageous anymore," Chin, author of "The AIDS Pandemic: The Collision of Epidemiology With Political Correctness," said from Berkeley, Calif.

The picture of the AIDS epidemic portrayed by the newer studies, and set to be endorsed by U.N. scientists, shows a massive concentration of infections in the southern third of Africa, with nations such as Swaziland and Botswana reporting as many as one in four adults infected with HIV.

Rates are lower in East Africa and much lower in West Africa. Researchers say that the prevalence of circumcision, which slows the spread of HIV, and regional variations in sexual behavior are the biggest factors determining the severity of the AIDS epidemic in different countries and even within countries.

Beyond Africa, AIDS is more likely to be concentrated among high-risk groups, such as users of injectable drugs, sex workers and gay men. More precise measurements of infection rates should allow for better targeting of prevention measures, researchers say.

Dr. Henry Bauer on Revisions of Imagined AIDS Numbers
How the Media Makes Good News out of Bad Information
hivskeptic.wordpress.com 29 November 2007

UNAIDS recently decreased by more than 6 million its estimate of the number of “HIV-infected” people, putting it now at 33 million as opposed to last year’s estimate of 39 plus million. The estimated number of new HIV cases was also lowered by 40%. (For useful commentary, see Science Guardian of November 20th.)

Media coverage failed to report clearly that the revision was only of statistically calculated estimates, not of the actual situation those numbers pretend to describe.

Thus an editorial on November 25 in the Arizona Republic had the heading, “Turning the corner on HIV is i