| Author |
Message |
    
Misty
Veteran Poster
Username: Misty
Post Number: 895
Registered: 02-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 19, 2007 - 01:25 am: | 
|
here are a few quotes from the article
"If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document." (Sunday Times (London) 28 nov. 1993)
Dr. Heinz Ludwig Sänger, Emeritus Professor of Molecular Biology and Virology, Max-Planck-Institutes for Biochemy, München. Robert Koch Award 1978:
"Up to today there is actually no single scientifically really convincing evidence for the existence of HIV. Not even once such a retrovirus has been isolated and purified by the methods of classical virology." (Letter to Süddeutsche Zeitung 2000)
Dr. Serge Lang, Professor of Mathematics, Yale University:
"I do not regard the causal relationship between HIV and any disease as settled. I have seen considerable evidence that highly improper statistics concerning HIV and AIDS have been passed off as science, and that top members of the scientific establishment have carelessly, if not irresponsible, joined the media in spreading misinformation about the nature of AIDS." (Yale Scientific, Fall 1994)
Dr. Harry Rubin, Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California at Berkeley:
"It is not proven that AIDS is caused by HIV infection, nor is it proven that it plays no role whatever in the syndrome." (Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994)
Dr. Richard Strohman, Emeritus Professor of Cell Biology at the University of California at Berkeley:
"In the old days it was required that a scientist address the possibilities of proving his hypothesis wrong as well as right. Now there's none of that in standard HIV-AIDS program with all its billions of dollars." (Penthouse April 1994)"
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/controversy.htm
another article with quotes
"Most leading scientists agree that there is virtually no proof that AIDS is a transmitted disease of any sort, much less that there is an "HIV" virus that causes it - in fact, this so-called "HIV" virus itself has never been isolated. Not once! Furthermore, "HIV" tests are notoriously unreliable, and many (or all) AIDS diagnoses are actually mistaken diagnoses of other, well-established diseases. The degree of credibility given to this shoddy "evidence", as well as the sheer amount of money spent on combating an AIDS "epidemic" spread by the "HIV virus" clearly indicate the presence of another force in play here, one that stands to gain from such a situation. "
here are some quotes from another article on aids
"aids has stayed within the defined at-risk sectors of the population (e.g. drug users, homosexual men) and hasn't expanded exponentially into the general population. Despite Oprah's dire warnings (remember those?), heterosexual non-drug users (at any rate, those who eat properly and who have no significant toxin exposure) have not in fact been ravaged by aids. Prostitutes who don't do drugs and have no other catabolic stresses haven't been ravaged by aids. "
"But the vast majority of aids deaths were not and are not caused by nitrite poppers. Hardly. Poppers merely began the aids furore. nowadays the classic popper-induced disease (Kaposi's Sarcoma, a dangerous cancerous lesion in the lungs) is no even longer defined as an aids disease - as the gay community drastically cut back on popper consumption in the early aids era. (However nitrite consumption is growing back again. By 2009 I predict that Kaposi's Sarcoma will be back on the CDC's list of aids diseases. You read it here first)
The real killer in aids (the real toxic cause) was and is iatrogenic poisoning: by which I mean the treatment for HIV infection itself causes the disease. AZT - the old wonder drug for aids - is an extremely toxic chemotherapy drug: 1000 mg of AZT a day for months or years would kill anyone. 90% of all those thousands of aids deaths in the AZT days were caused by toxic liver failure, noT by one of the CDC’s aids-defining diseases. Go figure.
These days doctors don't use AZT, or use less of it. They use cathepsin inhibitors. These aren't as poisonous as AZT, though they're still poisonous. Hence less patients are dropping dead, and so the HAART cocktail treatments have been hailed as miracle cures.
But my point would be - a cure for what? The only reason someone is given these sublethal aids “cures” is that they have reacted positively on a HIV test. They are assumed to be infected, even if they are symptomless, and therefore they come under a lot of pressure, both legal & moral, to comply with treatment. The treatment is poisonous (in the case of pure AZT extremely so) and so the patient tends to get worse. Result - you have an epidemic-by-diagnosis. You get diagnosed with the virus, and some time later you get sick.
But surely if an HIV test says you're infected, you're infected?
Well, no. The HIV tests (ELISA, Western Blot) have not been calibrated against the isolated virus itself. This is known as "gold standard calibration" - without such calibration, a serological test for viral antibodies has no business being used in medical practice. Without calibration you don’t know if your test is giving you a false-positive result or not.
There are over fifty conditions that have been documented to cause false positives in HIV tests. Some are probably statistically irrelevant (e.g. leprosy). But most are highly relevant. Tuberculosis, flu vaccination, recent tetanus vaccination, herpes, renal failure, pregnancy (second or later pregnancies particularly), rheumatoid arthritis, "sticky" blood (in Africans), "sickle cell" (in Africans), being African, organ transplants, malaria, hepatitis, haemophilia and antibodies to sperm have all known to create false-positives in HIV tests. Without calibration we don't know that anybody who's ever shown up positive on an HIV test actually had the virus - it could have been a false positive.
I repeat: without calibrating an HIV test against the virus itself it is impossible to use the test to indicate presence of the virus. The HIV tests react to proteins in the blood. To prove that they’re interacting with HIV proteins, you must have an isolate of HIV and be able to determine what the HIV proteins are.
So why not calibrate the tests already? Answer: you need an isolate of the virus to do this, and ... the HIV virus has not yet been isolated. There is a nobel prize waiting for the first person who can isolate HIV. no-one has done it. After twenty years we are entitled to ask if the virus is actually there to be isolated."
http://www.piclist.com/techref/other/aids.htm
|
Misty
Veteran Poster
Username: Misty
Post Number: 896
Registered: 02-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 19, 2007 - 01:38 am: |
|
more information on the contreversey surrounding rather or not hiv actually exists from biologists.
http://www.garynull.com/documents/continuum/ishivthecauseofaids.htm |
Schakspir
Veteran Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 1008
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 19, 2007 - 02:06 pm: |
|
I've suspected this for years, especially after nothing how Magic Johnson stopped "dying" of AIDS after he stopped taking AZT. Maybe it was AZT that killed Arthur Ashe and Rudolf Nureyev, not HIV.
Another thing I've discovered--and it may sound funny, but it isn't--is that rectal damage as a result of anal sex, especially unprotected anal sex, can lead to serious health problems, including infections, etc. If a busted colon comes in contact with seminal fluid, it can actually kill you. But some rectums are tougher than others, which is why some gays (and/or women) can survive it, while it may kill others. |
Schakspir
Veteran Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 1009
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 19, 2007 - 02:49 pm: |
|
"'sticky' blood (in Africans), "sickle cell" (in Africans), being African,"
AIDS/HIV really does seem like a massive racist medical fraud to me, especially upon reading this. |
Misty
Veteran Poster
Username: Misty
Post Number: 897
Registered: 02-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 19, 2007 - 08:31 pm: |
|
i'm not saying for sure that it doesnt exist because i still dotn know much about it but this is jsut the other sidethat i'm bringing to light...and they seem to have a bit of evidence to support tyheir claims...so its a possiblity that it doesnt exist although still i wouldnt bet money on them being right. |
Fortified
Regular Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 482
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 26, 2007 - 09:50 am: |
|
Look up "whole HIV isolate" on Google. You won't retrieve any hits. |
|
Email This Page