Damned Heretics

Condemned by the established, but very often right

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

Qualified outsiders and maverick insiders are often right about the need to replace received wisdom in science and society, as the history of the Nobel prize shows. This blog exists to back the best of them in their uphill assault on the massively entrenched edifice of resistance to and prejudice against reviewing, let alone revising, ruling ideas. In support of such qualified dissenters and courageous heretics we search for scientific paradigms and other established beliefs which may be maintained only by the power and politics of the status quo, comparing them with academic research and the published experimental and investigative record.

We especially defend and support the funding of honest, accomplished, independent minded and often heroic scientists, inventors and other original thinkers and their right to free speech and publication against the censorship, mudslinging, false arguments, ad hominem propaganda, overwhelming crowd prejudice and internal science politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, health and medicine, diet and nutrition.

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Henry Bauer, Peter Breggin , Harvey Bialy, Giordano Bruno, Erwin Chargaff, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Crick, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw, Freeman Dyson, Peter Duesberg, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, John Fewster, Galileo Galilei, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Edward Jenner, Benjamin Jesty, Michio Kaku, Adrian Kent, Ernst Krebs, Thomas Kuhn, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling, Eric Penrose, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick, Sherwood Rowland, Carl Sagan, Otto Rossler, Fred Singer, Thomas Szasz, Alfred Wegener, Edward O. Wilson, James Watson.
----------------------------------------------

Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

Skepticism is dangerous. That’s exactly its function, in my view. It is the business of skepticism to be dangerous. And that’s why there is a great reluctance to teach it in schools. That’s why you don’t find a general fluency in skepticism in the media. On the other hand, how will we negotiate a very perilous future if we don’t have the elementary intellectual tools to ask searching questions of those nominally in charge, especially in a democracy? – Carl Sagan (The Burden of Skepticism, keynote address to CSICOP Annual Conference, Pasadena, April 3/4, 1982).

It is really important to underscore that everything we’re talking about tonight could be utter nonsense. – Brian Greene (NYU panel on Hidden Dimensions June 5 2010, World Science Festival)

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing ever interfered with my learning was my education. My name as you already perceive without a doubt is George Bernard Shaw, and I certainly approve of this blog, in that its guiding spirit appears to be blasphemous in regard to the High Church doctrines of science, and it flouts the censorship of the powers that be, and as I have famously remarked, all great truths begin as blasphemy, and the first duty of the truthteller is to fight censorship, and while I notice that its seriousness of purpose is often alleviated by a satirical irony which sometimes borders on the facetious, this is all to the good, for as I have also famously remarked, if you wish to be a dissenter, make certain that you frame your ideas in jest, otherwise they will seek to kill you.  My own method was always to take the utmost trouble to find the right thing to say, and then to say it with the utmost levity. (Photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt for Life magazine) One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of ways. – Bertrand Russell, Conquest of Happiness (1930) ch. 9

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Belief)

BEST VIEWED IN LARGE FONT
Expanded GUIDE TO SITE PURPOSE AND LAYOUT is in the lower blue section at the bottom of every home page.

Fauci gonged again. Are two Nobels next?

Director of NIAID awarded Presidential Medal of Freedom, but may be losing influence

Critics of paradigm complain that massive censorship is not “freedom”

Is the SS HIV/AIDS running into pack ice? Why are its officers hiding?

bushandfauci.jpgThe much honored and celebrated director of NIAID, the smartly tailored and trimmed Anthony Fauci, was once saluted by President Ronald Reagan as a “hero of AIDS”, and he pocketed a Lasker Award last year (see previous post Fauci wins Lasker).

Now this outstanding bureaucrat, more responsible than anybody else in the US for the massive war on “HIV/AIDS” being conducted here and around the world, and in particular, its rationale that “HIV” and nothing else causes “AIDS”, was awarded, as the Washington Post notes with a very nice picture in Bush bestows Presidential Medal of Freedom awards, the Medal of Freedom on Friday (Jun 20 2008).

Here is what the President said as he awarded the prizes (or at least, what the pr release from the White House said he said):

Three decades ago, a mysterious and terrifying plague began to take the lives of people across the world. Before this malady even had a name, it had a fierce opponent in Dr. Anthony Fauci. As the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for more than 23 years, Tony Fauci has led the fight against HIV and AIDS. He was also a leading architect and champion of the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which over the past five years has reached millions of people — preventing HIV infections in infants and easing suffering and bringing dying communities back to life.

The man who would lead the fight against this dreaded disease came from an Italian American family in Brooklyn. Even as a boy, Tony was distinguished by his courage. In a neighborhood full of Brooklyn Dodgers fans — (laughter) — he rooted for the Yankees. (Laughter.) Tony earned a full scholarship to Regis High School, a Jesuit school in Manhattan. And he still quotes what he learned from Jesuit teaching: “Precision of thought, economy of expression.” And now you know why he never ran for public office. (Laughter.)

Those who know Tony do admit one flaw: sometimes he forgets to stop working. He regularly puts in 80-hour weeks. And from time to time, he’s even found notes on his windshield left by coworkers that say things like, “Go home. You’re making me feel guilty.” (Laughter.) A friend once commented that Tony was so obsessed with work that his wife must be a pretty patient woman. The truth of the matter is, she’s very busy herself. Christine Grady is a renowned bioethicist. And together they raised three talented daughters: Jennifer, Meghan, and Allison. And I hope each of you know that for all Tony has accomplished, he considers you to be one of his — not one of his — his most important achievement. Your love and support have strengthened him as he works to save lives across the world.

For his determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer and healthier lives, I’m proud to award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Dr. Anthony S. Fauci. (Applause.)

Of course, the big news here for this audience is that Fauci’s wife, Christine Grady, is a “bioethicist”, which must amaze those who like to call her husband the Dr. Mengele of HIV/AIDS, which is very impolite, but not undeserved on the grounds that he has blocked media review of the rationale on which the often fatal drug AZT was and still is administered (though less of it, along with other ARVs) to his loyal congregation of gay AIDS patients.

Perhaps the truth is that Dr Fauci never sees his wife, what with his 80 hour work week running the global anti-HIV political and propaganda machine. He barely has enough time for sleep, it would seem, which may explain why he resists further thinking about the issue of HIV and AIDS, and wishes nobody else to raise the vexed topic. Or perhaps it is because he has already given an inattentive world the final answer to HIV/AIDS, and no one has yet noticed (see below).

6pierrepiot.jpgSometimes the Medal is awarded to grease the honoree’s exit from his official position, as in the case of George Tenet, mushy headed ex-director of the CIA, so we hope this is not indicative of this great public servant’s imminent departure from his leadership role. After all, it is not certain that the global HIV/AIDS system could survive the loss intact, especially when the UNAID’s unshaven Pierre Piot is stepping down as he quietly announced in April (Head of UN’s AIDS program Piot to step down).

Why not the Nobel?

Can the Nobel be far behind? This blog hurries to point out that we have already nominated the natty functionary for the top prize in science, despite our fundamental quarrel with his propaganda on behalf of the unlikely, unproven, in fact thoroughly reviewed and rejected and effectively disproven notion that HIV causes “AIDS” or any illness of any kind (“AIDS” illnesses all have other clear causes, as elucidated from 1986 onwards by the best scientist in the field, Peter Duesberg, see rest of blog, starting with post number one).

Of course, we deplore the neatly groomed NIAID director’s imposition of censorship on the ‘What is the true cause of AIDS?’ debate for the last two decades. Long ago Fauci notoriously noted in a AAAS newsletter than any reporter who raised the topic of Peter Duesberg, and Duesberg’s complete rejection of HIV as the cause of “AIDS” in reviews written in the highest journals in science, would be treated as unqualified to report on the topic of “AIDS” and his/her phone calls never again returned by the pr staff or the scientists under Dr Fauci’s paramilitary NIAID command:

AIDS has created a whole new interaction between scientists and the press (…) Journalists who make too many mistakes or who are too sloppy are going to find that their access to scientists may diminish.

But we have no trouble at all in recognizing the great man as a leader in advancing the cause of the critics of HIV.

6fauci-in-white-coat.jpgFor in Fauci’s discreetly schizophrenic analysis of how HIV/AIDS works, he publicly acknowledged in answer to an question by the distinguished Science Guardian consultant Robert G. Houston that HIV not only did not kill T-cells, it provoked their increased production. This helpful admission was made at the New School panel in 2006 (see previous post AIDS elite at 25 – top trio meets in public at the New School tonight) in which Fauci explained to Houston how HIV caused T cell depletion and AIDS by provoking such a generous expansion of the number of these vital foot soldiers of the immune system that the supply was somehow exhausted in the end, though why this should happen was not clear. Eventually the body “ran out of steam”, Fauci offered.

A thorough account of this watershed event and the Fauci Steam Theory of AIDS is at this post, How Fauci solved AIDS, which also had interesting comments attached.

The main point, however, is one which we hereby underline while Fauci is basking in the glory of his new Medal, since we are not sure it is widely appreciated yet as his greatest achievement of all: Fauci is the one who has discovered the ultimate vaccine against HIV, the one sure antidote to HIV/AIDS, and still no one except the editors of Science Guardian has recognized this giant step forward for mankind: Fauci has shown that the best answer to HIV…is HIV!

Fauci’s Steaming HIV Theory

It is a pity that the media seem to have ignored the true significance of these important SG/NAR posts, and the Fauci views they recorded.

For the bottom line of what Fauci publicly told Houston, and wrote in the quiet backwaters of a specialist textbook perused only in the library by the dedicated deep researchers of Science Guardian/New AIDS Review, in paragraphs apparently hidden from the eyes of mainstream media reporters who otherwise faithfully follow, transcribe and reproduce every precious word that comes from the handsomely clipped head of the best dressed man in Washington, is that HIV/AIDS can solved without drugs:

Several investigators have demonstrated that there is an increase in CD4+ T-cell proliferation in both HIV and SIV infection. In certain studies, the enhanced T-cell proliferation that was observed during active disease was significantly decreased following the initiation of anti-retroviral therapy, and proliferation increased again in parallel with plasma viremia following the cessation of treatment in these individuals.

What we are trying to draw attention to is what now must be labeled The Fauci Steam Theory of and Solution to HIV/AIDS , which is a double barreled solution to World AIDS as follows:

1) If there is any concern that HIV is causing any problems, simply add more HIV.

2) If the body shows any sign of “running out of steam”, add proper nutrients.

This is why we nominate Anthony Fauci for the Nobel. For in company with Peter Duesberg, John P. Moore of Cornell, Robert C. Gallo, Luc Montagnier, and Kevin De Cock, he has revealed the truth about HIV/AIDS which he has long attempted to curtain off from the media, namely, that HIV is not harmful, and that any and all of “AIDS” illnesses are caused by other factors, which are not even “co-factors”, but entirely independent factors, which do not need HIV to do their dirty work.

But it is Anthony Fauci, and Anthony Fauci alone, who has made the ultimate breakthrough and endorsed HIV as a positive antidote to itself, the single best answer to HIV positivity.

For this, this fine bureaucrat, despite his strenuous attempts to restrain media recognition and discussion of this line of thinking (that lets HIV off the hook as a cause of “AIDS”), which we can only presume are motivated by a sincere modesty and unwillingness to take credit for his seminal breakthrough, has brought to the world what it has long sought, in fact spent billions over two decades trying to find: the Final Solution to HIV/AIDS.

Fauci’s cost free solution to “AIDS”

6anthony-fauci.jpgWhat is more, the cost of Fauci’s solution is minimal, compared to the projected cost of AIDS drugs and an AIDS vaccine. It is, in fact, cost free.

Fauci’s answer to HIV/AIDS is the simplest one of all, and one long advocated by the critics of the paradigm. When tested HIV positive, take the following action: Do nothing at all, other than eat and live in healthy fashion, and most particularly, do not have anything at all to do with conventional HIV/AIDS treatment and medication.

The lesson of course for policymakers is to withdraw all funding from HIV/AIDS, and apply it to ensuring that the health infrastructure, nutrition and living conditions of nations and individuals are maximized, and all possible measures to combat real disease such as TB and malaria (together probably the real nature of most of African “AIDS”, other than undernourishment and starvation) be taken.

Much AIDS is malnutrition in Africa, and food restores HIV+ babies to normal

Just how damaging and widespread malnutrition is in Africa is being underlined tonight on 60 Minutes, which has a section on Plumpynuts, a simple and wildly successful intervention in Africa where the visible and hidden malnutrition of Niger’s black tots is countered by bags of a ready-to-eat peanut mix equivalent to milk plus vitamins. The aim is to get it to 120,000 kids by next year, but it still be a drop in the bucket – 120 million starving small children around the world need it, and five million die each year without it.

This is the kind of thing which the makes the New York Times editorial yesterday, A Global AIDS Campaign Stalled, wringing its hands over the hold up to the $50 billion expected to be authorized by Congress for the Global AIDS-Malaria-TB campaign, look a little more ignorant than normal. Apart from the usual boiler plate of “H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS,” the concern for the enormous jump in funding for the next five years (it was $19 billion for the last five years) seems entirely focused on “all the treatment and prevention programs needed to quell the epidemic”. Hurry up and pass the bill before the purse strings tighten next year urges the editorial writer, anxious to circumcise as many Africans as possible.

Perhaps someone should force this writer to sit down and watch the 60 Minutes episode, and then thrust this paper (noted today at AIDSWiki) in front of them: Home-based therapy with ready-to-use therapeutic food is of benefit to malnourished, HIV-infected Malawian children (Acta Paediatr. 2005 Feb;94(2):222-5), which shows that food restores children to normal weight more effectively that ARVs:

CONCLUSION: More than half of malnourished, HIV-infected children not receiving antiretroviral chemotherapy benefit from home-based nutritional rehabilitation. Home-based therapy RUTF is associated with more rapid weight gain and a higher likelihood of reaching 100% weight-for-height

.
Here is the full summary:

Home-based therapy with ready-to-use therapeutic food is of benefit to malnourished, HIV-infected Malawian children.Ndekha MJ, Manary MJ, Ashorn P, Briend A.
College of Medicine, University of Malawi, Malawi.
AIM: To determine if home-based nutritional therapy will benefit a significant fraction of malnourished, HIV-infected Malawian children, and to determine if ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) is more effective in home-based nutritional therapy than traditional foods. METHODS: 93 HIV-positive children >1 y old discharged from the nutrition unit in Blantyre, Malawi were systematically allocated to one of three dietary regimens: RUTF, RUTF supplement or blended maize/soy flour. RUTF and maize/soy flour provided 730 kJ x kg(-1) x d(-1), while the RUTF supplement provided a fixed amount of energy, 2100 kJ/d. These children did not receive antiretroviral chemotherapy. Children were followed fortnightly. Children completed the study when they reached 100% weight-for-height, relapsed or died. Outcomes were compared using regression modeling to account for differences in the severity of malnutrition between the dietary groups. RESULTS: 52/93 (56%) of all children reached 100% weight-for-height. Regression modeling found that the children receiving RUTF gained weight more rapidly and were more likely to reach 100% weight-for-height than the other two dietary groups (p < 0.05).CONCLUSION: More than half of malnourished, HIV-infected children not receiving antiretroviral chemotherapy benefit from home-based nutritional rehabilitation. Home-based therapy RUTF is associated with more rapid weight gain and a higher likelihood of reaching 100% weight-for-height. PMID: 15981758

Such studies bring home the extreme tragedy that anyone should think that AIDS drugs are the right intervention for African children.

With NIAID shut down, a second Nobel?

nobelpeaceprize1.jpgSince Anthony Fauci’s view, on the other hand, implies the immediate shutdown of all NIAID activity, we are newly stunned by the daring and public responsibility of his leadership in this respect.

Could it be that the man deserves two Nobels, the Biochemistry prize for solving HIV/AIDS shared with Peter Duesberg and Robert Gallo, and the Nobel Peace Prize, shared with Peter Duesberg, for doing the most to serve the public interest by diverting the billions spent on HIV/AIDS to the proper targets?

After all, for any bureaucrat, let alone a champion milker of the public purse such as the dapper Fauci, to propose shutting down his own fiefdom is probably unprecedented in the history of Washington.

The AIDS platform is cracking

Of course, we have to note as an afterthought Dr. Fauci’s willingness to step off the high platform on which he has perched and preened for so many successful fund raising years may be influenced by hearing it creaking under his polished shoes.

The UNAID rushed to issue a press release in the aftermath of Kevin De Cock’s watershed admission that heterosexual AIDS is a non starter after all, trying to reassure all concerned that the urgent global HIV/AIDS threat remains as vast as ever –
Aids claim sparks backlash for WHO

The World Health Organisation was struggling yesterday to control the global backlash from an admission by one of its most senior directors that the threat of a generalised heterosexual epidemic of Aids outside Africa may be over.

The WHO has been under siege since Kevin de Cock, head of its HIV/Aids department, told The Independent on Sunday that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, the disease was recognised to be largely limited to high-risk groups, such as injecting drug users.

Facing headlines such as “World Aids pandemic over”, specialists fear a media onslaught could hinder efforts to help those infected, and fuel further spread. One said: “People are using the interview to say all scientists are lying and funding for Aids should be cut. Kevin de Cock is the most committed, cautious epidemiologist but now a lot of people want to take him down.”

In a statement in response to the interview, the WHO said: “Aids remains the leading infectious disease challenge in global health. To suggest otherwise is irresponsible and misleading.”

The latest WHO report says that at the end of 2007 there were 33 million people with HIV; 2.5 million were infected that year; and 2.1 million died of Aids.

But the damage control was late, for at least one on line columnist, Brendan O’Neill at the Guardian of London (no relation to Science Guardian) had already committed himself to accepting De Cock’s rash admission, complaining that we have all been misled for two decades for the plain reason that HIV/AIDS governmental and non governmental organizations need funds from the public, and these will only flow freely if the threat to heterosexuals is talked up.

As O’Neill wrote in
The exploitation of Aids: 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 Organisation’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 at the weekend that, outside very poor African countries, Aids is confined to “high-risk groups”, including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers. And even in these communities it remains quite rare. “It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in countries [outside sub-Saharan Africa]”, he said. In other words? All that hysterical fearmongering about Aids spreading among sexed-up western youth was a pack of lies.

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 Organisation’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 at the weekend that, outside very poor African countries, Aids is confined to “high-risk groups”, including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers. And even in these communities it remains quite rare. “It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in countries [outside sub-Saharan Africa]”, he said. In other words? All that hysterical fearmongering 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. 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”.

Some people knew it earlier. In 1987, my friend and colleague Dr Michael Fitzpatrick wrote a fiery pamphlet titled The Truth About the Aids Panic. At the height of the Conservative government’s scary tombstone campaign (“Don’t die of ignorance”), he wrote: “There is no good evidence that Aids is likely to spread rapidly in the West among heterosexuals.” In Britain, most of the small-scale spread of “heterosexual Aids” has been a result of infected individuals arriving from Africa. In the UK in the whole of the 1980s – the decade of the Great Aids Panic – there were 20 cases of HIV acquired through heterosexual contact with an individual infected in Europe.

And it isn’t the case that the heterosexual pandemic failed to materialise 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 recognise 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, and which should be vociferously tackled by the medical authorities, the “war against Aids” was turned into moral crusade.

Both Conservative and New Labour governments exploited the disease to create a new moral framework for society. Through baseless fearmongering, officials sought to police and regulate the behaviour of the public. No longer able to appeal to outdated Victorian ideals of chastity or restraint, the powers-that-be used the spectre of an Aids calamity to terrify us into behaving “responsibly” in sexual and social matters.

They were aided and abetted by the rump of the radical left. Gay rights campaigners, feminists and left-leaning health and social workers stood shoulder-to-shoulder, first with the Tories and later with Labour, 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-civilised western societies into diseased dystopias were denounced as “Aids deniers” and “heretics”. Anyone who suggested that homosexuals were at greater risk than heterosexuals – and therefore the focus of government funding and, where necessary, medical assistance should be in gay communities – 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 – where there is a serious and deadly Aids crisis in some countries – 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 behaviour. It also adds a new gloss to the misanthropic population-control arguments of western charities, which now present their promotion of condoms in “overly fecund” Africa as a means of preventing the spread of disease.

The relentless politicisation and moralisation 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 $1bn a year in activities such as “raising awareness” about Aids and preventing the emergence of the disease in communities that are at little risk. How many lives could that kind of money save, if it were used to develop drugs and deliver them to infected or at-risk communities? It is time people treated Aids as a normal disease, rather than as an opportunity for spreading their own moral agendas.However, the damage control seems to have dampened the fires somewhat, with few follows up by the major media other than Fox News. Liam Scheff, one of only three mainstream journalists still willing (courageous/foolhardy) to cover the topic of flaws in HIV/AIDS ideology and practice (Celia Farber and Anthony Liversidge being the other two), and well known for his investigative pieces in AIDS drug experiments conducted on orphans in New York, coverage which resulted in a BBC documentary, took the opportunity to land a few more blows in a notable piece on the Web at GNN (Guerilla News Network) on the subject of what else might be wrong with the standard line of propaganda in HIV/AIDS, There Will Be No Heterosexual AIDS Epidemic, Experts Admit:

How do “Hiv tests” work? In sum, they don’t work at all. They 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)……

So how did we get to, “it’s only gay men, Africans, drug addicts and prostitutes,“ from the advertised version for twenty-five 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.”“…

Here is the whole article, There Will Be No Heterosexual AIDS Epidemic, Experts Admit, though if you hit the link to GNN above you get the context and the photo; hit “Show” now, and “Hide” after reading to collapse it again:There Will Be No Heterosexual AIDS Epidemic, Experts Admit

WHO confesses to 25 years of misguided AIDS policies. But they still want you to believe them.

By Liam Scheff
Thu June 12 2008

It is 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).

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

“A 25-year health campaign was misplaced outside the continent of Africa,” the article concedes, daring you hang them all. And so they’re quick to add a massive fiction: “But the disease still kills more than all wars and conflicts.”

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.

How do “Hiv tests” work? In sum, they don’t work at all. They 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.” (Threatment of intestinal worms is associated with decreased HIV plasma viral load. J.AIDS, September, 2002)

How is “AIDS” diagnosed in Africa? AIDS in Africa is and has always been a clinical diagnosis. It is here too, but we’re more attached to a process of testing, which is, in essence, illusory, because the tests are limited to use in certain groups, for whom the non-specific tests are said to have a “higher positive predictive value,” or to be “more accurate.” But in Africa, this is dispensed with entirely, and “AIDS” is diagnosed based on the symptoms of hunger, thirst, 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 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, the humanitarian news and analysis service of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Cited by Scheff, 2005, Knowing is Beautiful. GNN)

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.”

What disease? AIDS? Or Poverty? And can you tell the difference from the tests?

“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 is the new philosophy of AIDS, and it’s quite a shift (From the Independent): “Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised 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 advertised version for twenty-five 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 H.I.V…. 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, (with and without original bits and pieces), 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 enough?

We used to have a science in the early 20th Century, that similarly was able to pick the unfit out of risk groups – it was called Eugenics. If humanity is nothing else, we are certainly dogged in our ability to re-invent our old, bad ideas, again and again.Elizabeth Pisani, author of an interesting new book The Wisdom of Whores: Bureaucrats, Brothels and the Business of Aids, dissecting international AIDS statistics with a moderately skeptical eye (she does not yet notice that it all makes sense if the paradigm HIV=AIDS is jettisoned), wrote a piece in the London Times, pointing out that the UN press release did not withdraw any of the facts stated by de Cock:

It was not to last. Before the meeting was even over, the WHO and UNAids came out with a press release, signed by Dr de Cock, billed as a “correction” to the newspaper report. But it didn’t point out any errors of fact, nor did it suggest that he had been misquoted. Instead, it claimed that HIV is a heterosexual disease that affects us all.

Just as it looked as though it might make a step forward, the UN has jumped back into a refusal to acknowledge the truth about Aids. Its stance will defend the jobs and budgets for a while, perhaps. But unless a better job is done of preventing the epidemic, we the taxpayer will tire of refilling the Aids funding trough. And we can’t do a better job of preventing HIV if we refuse to be honest about where it’s spreading.

Here’s the piece in full:Aids? There’s big money at stake
If the UN is serious about stopping HIV; then it must face up to some inconvenient facts
Elizabeth Pisani

Last week, I stood in the blinding sunshine outside the United Nations building in New York, watching cars disgorge eunuchs, activists and bureaucrats – all the usual suspects for another “UN high-level meeting on Aids”. Besides swelling profits of the New York hotel trade with money that could have been used to buy condoms and clean needles, what did this meeting achieve? Not a lot, I was prepared to report, but in fact the UN has managed to take a step backwards.

For all the talk of a “global pandemic”, there are two completely separate HIV epidemics in the world. One is in parts of Africa, where HIV is spread by unprotected sex between men and women who have more than one steady partner. Governments – such as Uganda’s, with its “zero grazing” approach to fidelity – that recognised the perils of the custom of having concurrent sexual partners confined the epidemic. Most didn’t. The result of the neglect is that in some countries up to two in five adults are infected with a fatal virus.

The second epidemic covers the rest of the globe. Nine out of ten humans (and three in ten of those infected with HIV) live in countries where the virus is spread mostly when people buy and sell sex, when they shoot up drugs, and when men have anal sex with lots of other men. Only a minority do these things in any country, but that still adds up to several million people worldwide. We know how to prevent HIV in these populations, and we have known for years that in Asia, the Americas, Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, if you do that prevention well, HIV won’t spread farther. Even if you don’t control HIV in these populations, it won’t go all that much farther.

If we don’t recognise this, we will never effectively prevent the spread of HIV. But a lot of UN agencies, governments and even Aids activists don’t want to recognise it. Governments don’t want to because it would mean recognising that if they want to deal with HIV they have to spend money on services for junkies, sex workers and gay men – groups that don’t top the popularity stakes with voters. Ironically, they will happily fund treatments for these people with expensive medicines once they do get sick. That is more acceptable to voters than to give cheap condoms and needles to prevent them getting infected in the first place.

Activists don’t want to recognise it because they fear (with some justification) that if HIV is seen as a disease of junkies, prostitutes and gays, they will lose both public support and money for prevention, as well as increasing prejudice against groups that are already vilified. A couple of UN agencies – the ones that actually spend money on doing things for those politically sensitive groups – share that fear. But most have a much greater fear of getting pushed away from the Aids funding trough. Since that trough now holds around $12 billion (£6 billion) a year and rising, it’s a lot to lose out on.

If the UN were to recognise that in most of the world Aids is not a multisectoral problem that threatens security or undermines economic development, then the agencies that work with agriculture or children would have to deal with drugs, commercial and homosexual sex, or get out. Since they want the money but not the inconvenience of dealing with such dirty issues, there is a conspiracy of silence.

If you dig into the entrails of the epidemiology chapters of the WHO/ UNAids reports, you will find that the UN’s public health experts acknowledge that HIV is never going to rage through other continents the way it has raged through Africa. But the numbers are usually sandwiched between “HIV affects us all” rhetoric that panders to the interests of everything but the truth.

That is why it was so surprising that Kevin de Cock, the head of the World Health Organisation’s HIV division, told a British newspaper the truth last week. He was quoted as saying “It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries [outside Africa]. Ten years ago a lot of people were saying there would be a generalised epidemic in Asia – China was the big worry with its huge population. That doesn’t look likely.”

That Dr de Cock, a respected scientist, said this just before the Aids circus at the UN was surely a great sign. Maybe the worthies in attendance would agree to focus prevention outside Africa on the people who need it most, instead of throwing away money on multisectoral planning jamborees and programmes for schoolgirls.

The UN even planned a session on how to find the political will to do exactly that, chaired by the President of El Salvador. (Sadly he could not summon up the political will to talk about how gay and commercial sex is driving the epidemic in El Salvador, and pulled out.) But still, at least the WHO had finally told it like it is. That must certainly make it harder for other UN agencies, grouped under UNaids, to defend their institutional interests against scientific evidence and the rational use of taxpayers’ money.

It was not to last. Before the meeting was even over, the WHO and UNAids came out with a press release, signed by Dr de Cock, billed as a “correction” to the newspaper report. But it didn’t point out any errors of fact, nor did it suggest that he had been misquoted. Instead, it claimed that HIV is a heterosexual disease that affects us all.

Just as it looked as though it might make a step forward, the UN has jumped back into a refusal to acknowledge the truth about Aids. Its stance will defend the jobs and budgets for a while, perhaps. But unless a better job is done of preventing the epidemic, we the taxpayer will tire of refilling the Aids funding trough. And we can’t do a better job of preventing HIV if we refuse to be honest about where it’s spreading.

Dr Elizabeth Pisani is an epidemiologist who has worked for more than a decade as a consultant to UNAids and the WHO and is the author of The Wisdom of Whores: Bureaucrats, Brothels and the Business of Aids.The levees are leaking

So is this brief step forward nullified and forgotten, and are we back to the same old denialism which marks official HIV/AIDS policymaking and media coverage under the iron rule of Anthony Fauci’s censorship?

We think not. The admission by De Cock is a permanent part of history now, and it has not been successfully denied, just swept under the carpet and effectively banned from mainstream media coverage, it seems clear. But it can be quoted with great effect in any objective review of the official ideology of HIV/AIDS, which has now turned into a litany of failure in finding cause or cure, global pandemic or even any increase in deaths in any population outside gays and drug addicts, and the unfortunate heterosexuals bamboozled into taking the damaging and often fatal AIDS drugs.

Let us pause to acknowledge that over half of all AIDS deaths are due to symptoms of drug intake, recreational or medical, and not AIDS symptoms.

Contrary to the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, over 50% of all American and European AIDS patients now die of liver, heart and kidney diseases – none of which are caused by HIV according to CDC definition. But these are the classical diseases of drug- and chemotherapy-related toxicity. (Duesberg, email).

In our view, the paradigm promotion propagandists in HIV/AIDS are not doing too well at present. The members of the Semmelweis society who objected to the Clean Hands prizes awarded to Duesberg and Farber this year and sabotaged their award ceremonies have been forced to resign from the society, and a statement supporting Duesberg has been issued by the Semmelweis president and posted on the front page of the HIV/AIDS paradigm critics site Rethinking AIDS:

Semmelweis Society International does not present the Clean Hands Award lightly. In Dr. Duesberg case, it is hard to imagine anyone more deserving than Professor Peter Duesberg and investigative reporter Celia Farber. These two have withstood a vicious and ongoing multiyear multicontinent personal onslaught against their livelihoods, their character, and their families that is unparalleled since the Spanish Inquisition.

Their sole “crime” is to ask if there has not been a colossal error in our thinking to date.

The simple facts are that nobody has ever been cured of AIDS. No Vaccine has ever been developed. Something is wrong here.

Dr. Duesberg has an idea, a contrarian idea; to be sure, it is an idea, nothing more, but nothing less.

Celia Farber’s “crime” is to have reported this contrarian idea, into a First Amendment Free Speech Protected Society, or so we all thought.

We pray that our elected officials will not succumb to the hostility and pressures that the AIDS/Pharma industry will use to discredit and further silence this most vital debate.

We at Semmelweis are proud of our decision to present Dr. Peter Duesberg and Celia Farber with our highest honor and wish them both all the best as they continue to find concrete answers to this elusive and misunderstood disease.

Sincerely, Roland F. Chalifoux Jr., DO, President, Semmelweis Society International

Of course, this might have been better phrased. Dr Duesberg has more than “an idea”, gentlemen: he has a series of thorough and complete reviews of the hypothesis, universally accepted but entirely unproven and unjustified, that HIV is the cause of HIV/AIDS, in peer reviewed, elite journals, with copious footnotes and no answer at the same level in twenty years to his thorough rejection of any role for HIV in causing any human sickness, except in its ability to trigger the administration of powerful and often fatal drugs.

But it stands for one more victory for the forces of reason who have argued so long and so reasonably for review of the politically generated and protected paradigm of HIV/AIDS.

Similarly, the admissions of de Cock once published in a major British daily serve as a signal setback for the promoters of the paradigm led by Dr Fauci. After all, this is a crumbling of the first main pillar of the HIV/AIDS ideology. The second, of course, is the eternally challenged idea that HIV is the cause,

One shoe has been heard

vangoghshoes.jpgOr to put it more simply, one shoe has dropped.

When the other shoe will drop is of course the $240 billion question in HIV/AIDS, and unanswerable for now. But it surely must be coming closer, as De Cock’s admissions now amount to a large crack in the AIDS platform on which Fauci et al stand. Like Bill Clinton at the UN, it must be slightly disconcerting to find the planks beneath one’s feet creaking ominously as one delivers one’s propaganda speeches.

What might be a tiny sign of this nervous retrenchment is the remarkable removal of the names of John P. Moore and Richard Jefferys from the list of names serving the operations of the falsely named AIDSTruth.org site, actually a disinformation site attempting to undermine critics of the paradigm with spurious contradictions and ad hominem attacks.

John P. Moore of Cornell was one of the founders of this misleading, anti-scientific, slanderous embarrassment. Could it be that someone at last has threatened these two with a lawsuit for slander?

If so, it is about time. There is nothing more shameful in science than the shenanigans of John P. Moore and Mark Wainberg of Montreal in their underhanded and vicious counterattacks on critics of the HIV paradigm, which include calling the officials of a university and trying to get thoughtful and outspoken teachers fired for having an unconventional opinion on HIV/AIDS, an opinion which matches the peer reviewed critique of Peter Duesberg and the evidence in the best literature, which clearly shows year after year that the theory launched by Gallo that HIV causes AIDS should have been shelved as an embarrassment to science from the very beginning.

17 Responses to “Fauci gonged again. Are two Nobels next?”

  1. Michael Says:

    Interesting as well, is the mention of Fauci’s “Jesuit” training. Explains the likely catholic guilt and shame based homophobic beliefs of Fauci’s that is likely what drives him to never question the ridiculousness of any “wrath of God” factor that he must yet subconciously believe, wherein a virus that only attacks what Fauci and the so called “moral majority” considers to be the “sexual deviates” and “lesser children” of god, namely gays and blacks, drug addicts, and poverty stricken of the 3rd world.

    The thing that is of great concern, is that if WE dissidents fail to continue the pressure, and fail to fully dismantle the SS HIV/AIDS, the gay and black communities, who have been the ones decimated by this, will continue to be the targets of this terror. The orthodoxy of HIV researchers, the pharma companies, and likely those yet paroanoid delusionals of the gay and black communities, are not going to let go of hiv/aids until we do whatever we have to do to pry it out of their ugly little hands. If we do not stick together on this, those who have pulled this massive blunder will be able to continue to terrorize the public, and will get off “scott free”, and mankind itself will have learned absolutely nothing from the entire sordid affair!

    Therefore, Gentlemen, I propose that it is time to follow our stiff upperpunches to the orthodoxy with a few serious kicks to their nuts.

    We need to make absolutely sure this monster does not in any way, shape or form, continue to stand, nor attempt to get back on its feet, once it falls asunder.

    Enough is more than enough!

    So, Let’s DO IT, all of us, whatever “it” is that we need to do to fully, and finally, slay this beast!

    Is it not time to once and for all OFFICIALLY end this terror and tyranny that is yet ensnaring the unaware, and yet still looming over the minds of man?

    And if not us rethinkers and dissidents, then WHO WILL?

    As such, I myself, and a few other leading dissidents, as yet preferring to be “unnamed”, are currently setting up a website and organization to deal with not only HIV/AIDS, but also many current and even related important social issues, but especially, ESPECIALLY, to slay this HIV/AIDS monster once and for all.

    I hereby invite ALL to join, as soon as the site is prepared, as we will no doubt need EVERYONES assistance possible, to get the website together and to decide upon and to carry out our yet to be determined strategies.

    The organization will soon be located on the internet and I will post the website address as soon as it is available.

  2. Michael Says:

    Lets rewind to 10 years ago!!!!

    THE FAUCI FILES: The IL-2 Antiviral Hoax, U.S. Patent # US1995000452440

    October 1, 1999

    Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institutes
    of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
    Diseases has been the single person in charge of HIV/AIDS
    research since the onset of the epidemic. Under Fauci’s
    tutelage, fraud in research not only prospered, but has
    become institutionalized (thanks, in no small part, to
    Fauci’s role in disbanding the ethics police). At the
    National Institutes of Health, the crooks are firmly in
    charge and the rigors of scientific discipline have been
    substituted with the quick fixes of Junk Science schemes,
    bribes for bureaucrats and a proliferation of lucrative
    treatment hoaxes. While the HAART Treatment Hoax has
    flopped face-down in the steaming cow-pie of D.B.A.D. reality
    (Deaths Before an AIDS Diagnosis), perhaps it isn’t too
    late to take a closer look at another treatment
    hoax: The Dr. Anthony S. Fauci IL-2 Treatment Hoax. Let’s
    see what Captain Fauci has done to help himself as he
    deliberately steered the HIV Research Titantic straight into
    the proverbial iceberg with his first and only patent
    (patent application details are included below):

    IL-2 Intermittent Therapy.

    While most inventors file dozens, or even hundreds of patents
    before they have a winner, such is certainly not the case
    with Dr. Fauci’s first and only patent: IL-2 Intermittent Therapy.
    As a self-described “scientist”, Fauci has proven that he is exempt
    from the hit-and-miss strategy of the invention process. Because
    “The Game” is rigged, only one patent will be required for Fauci
    “to win”.

    What comes with this patent is a certain atmosphere of selective
    “shyness” by Dr. Fauci and the other top leaders of the enormous
    NIH, the health agency assigned the important task of safeguarding
    America’s health. So what is it about Dr. Fauci’s patent that turns
    so many outspoken luminaries of medicine into a collective of
    deaf-mutes?

    What’s wrong here? This is America and this is an invention, isn’t it?
    Why isn’t Fauci and The Gang celebrating like real Americans?
    Why must they act like they are embarrassed for their corruption,
    secret business deals and fifth-rate comprehension of science?

    While most inventors are deservedly so proud of the results
    of their long hours and diligent efforts that they WANT the
    world to know — why isn’t that the case with
    NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, M.D.?

    Wouldn’t you think that Dr. Fauci, NIAID and the NIH would have
    been proud to announce the approval of the first and only patent
    of perhaps its most important Institute Director? So why no
    announcement? Why no press release? Why all the deafening silence?

    Why does Fauci offer spin control, obfuscation, deception
    and outright lies instead of facts? Why does the NIH close up
    shop when one inquires about Fauci’s reported HUGE leaps in salary
    at this government health agency? Why the stoned silence and
    bureaucratic smoke screens regarding reported “double-dipping”
    by Fauci? (Even NIH Director Varmus won’t respond to confirm or
    deny Fauci’s reported retirement from the Public Health Service
    and re-employment in the Executive Service at five or more times
    his previous salary — is Varmus covering up something illegal,
    such as Fauci being paid retirement AND salary simultaneously
    — what’s going on here???)

    Why won’t Fauci speak of his personal business dealings with Chiron,
    the company which appears to have been summarily granted the
    manufacturing license for IL-2 in this non-competitive Byzantine
    atmosphere of secret business deals?

    Why does Fauci continue to personally direct and speak on behalf
    of his PERSONAL IL-2 patent conflict of interest when the NIH
    Attorney Robert Lanman stated over a year ago that the IL-2
    research would be transferred to the National Cancer Institute,
    a claim that is obviously false? How bad can things be
    when even the NIH legal department gets caught in The Big Lie?

    While Fauci claims that his $150,000 annual “royalties” are
    “going to charity”, why won’t Fauci or Lanman or NIH Director
    Varmus disclose WHICH “charity” purportedly gets the cash?
    Might that be too embarassing when the “charity” turns out
    to be something ludicrous like “The Fauci Children’s College Fund”
    or “The Fauci Institute” ? What about the PAST royalties
    (since 1993)?

    Of course, the $150K annual royalty is “chump change” when
    compared to the tens of millions that Fauci and friends stand
    to make on the IL-2 Treatment Hoax. As one would expect, this
    is where the Freedom of Information Act NIH/NIAID attorneys slam
    the brakes on ANYTHING with Fauci’s name on it — ALL financial
    records, declarations etc. are off limits to the prying eyes
    of the American public.

    Why was Fauci’s name conspicuously missing from the patent of the
    same name that was filed in 1993 when Fauci and his subordinates
    Lane and Kovacs had already been engaged in years of
    taxpayer-funded IL-2 human experiments at NIAID? Why did
    Fauci keep his name off the patent until December, 1997
    when the Patent Office approved the same patent, but this time
    with Fauci listed as inventor?

    Director Fauci claimed that the omission of his name from his only
    patent at that point was due to a “clerical error”. Are we also
    to believe that the army of patent attorneys retained by the
    NIH also managed to “overlook” the tiny detail having to
    do with putting the #1 Director’s name on his only patent?
    Are we to also believe that the same clerical error was
    repeated when Fauci’s name was omitted from the Lane/Kovacs
    1995 article about IL-2 published in the New England Journal
    of Medicine (where the IL-2 patent was disclosed)?

    After over a decade of millions of taxpayer dollars for DOZENS of
    Fauci-directed IL-2 “clinical trials”, why is it that (in 1999) the
    ONLY actual claim of “efficacy” seems to end up with
    a single unpublished and non-peer-reviewed anecdotal
    case of a person who was perfectly healthy and HIV-positive
    when the clinical “trial” was started? Indeed, a real scientist
    would instinctively apply Occam’s Razor to explain that the
    patient would have even been BETTER OFF in the total absence
    of toxic interventionist “treatment”! But that has nothing to
    do with the bottom-rung scientists of Fauci’s ilk and today’s
    Orwellian standard of medical Junk Science.

    Why study a toxic and dangerous treatment like IL-2 using healthy
    HIV-positive people? Perhaps the question has more to do with which
    study group would put the best possible face on a harmful treatment.
    After all, Fauci, Lane and Kovacs admitted long ago that IL-2
    didn’t “work” for sick people. It made them sicker faster. It
    killed them. It caused and/or promoted cancers. So what do these
    Giants of Junk Science do? They begin to study a treatment
    for the “sick” — IL-2 — in the healthiest non-sick people
    they could find! Now they claim that IL-2 can only “work”
    when those healthy people are also using a cocktail of cancer
    drugs known as “HAART” (the “cocktail treatment” trend is an
    important drug industry concept as it entirely obliterates the
    notion of accountability or blame for any single treatment
    option when the 20-something year old non-AIDS HIV+ patient
    plops over dead of a heart attack, stroke or other acute organ
    system failure, as has been the case with HAART).

    So now you know what your government’s public servants have
    been up to for the past couple of decades in HIV, but not
    necessarily AIDS, research. In fact, as an independent statistical
    measure, the surge in the category known as “D.B.A.D.” tells
    us exactly how we are doing these days — specifically
    in the area of “Deaths Before (an) AIDS Diagnosis”. If these
    people aren’t dying of AIDS, then what’s been killing them
    in droves, if not the cancer drugs that have been repackaged
    as HAART “antiviral” cocktails?

    fred

    This detail information can be viewed in its entirety at:

    http://www.patents.ibm.com/details?pn=US05696079__

    US5696079: Immunologic enhancement with intermittent
    interleukin-2 therapy

    Inventor(s):
    Lane; H. Clifford , Bethesda, MD
    Kovacs; Joseph A. , Potomac, MD
    Fauci; Anthony S. , Washington, DC

    Applicant(s): The United States of America as represented by the
    Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC

    Issued/Filed Dates: Dec. 9, 1997 / May. 26, 1995

    Application Number:US1995000452440

    Abstract:
    A method for activating a mammalian immune system entails a series
    of IL-2 administrations that are effected intermittently over an
    extended period. Each administration of IL-2 is sufficient to
    allow spontaneous DNA synthesis in peripheral blood or lymph node
    cells of the patient to increase and peak, and each subsequent
    administration follows the preceding administration in the series
    by a period of time that is sufficient to allow IL-2 receptor
    expression in peripheral or lymph node blood of the patient to
    increase, peak and then decrease to 50% of peak value. This
    intermittent IL-2 therapy can be combined with another therapy
    which targets a specific disease state, such as an anti-retroviral
    therapy comprising, for example, the administration of AZT, ddI or
    interferon alpha. In addition, IL-2 administration can be employed
    to facilitate in situ transduction of T cells in the context of
    gene therapy. By this approach the cells are first activated in
    vivo via the aforementioned IL-2 therapy, and transduction then is
    effected by delivering a genetically engineered retrovital vector
    directly to the patient.

    Attorney, Agent, or Firm: Foley & Lardner;

    Primary/Assistant Examiners: Ulm; John; Sorensen; Kenneth A.

  3. Michael Says:

    Is there some part of the word GENOCIDE that you guys don’t get???

  4. Truthseeker Says:

    Michael, if you have some reasoning to offer please give it. Surely you are not accusing Dr Fauci of purposely risking the lives of gay people in order to expand his power and position in Washington and the world? This unlikely for such an upstanding citizen, one who only last year was given the Lasker award. His wife, after all, is a bioethicist, and it is well known that husbands do not get away with anything if their wives are involved.

  5. Michael Says:

    —– Forwarded message from mgeiger@simplyweb.net —–
    Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:00:19 -0700
    From: mgeiger@simplyweb.net
    Reply-To: mgeiger@simplyweb.net
    Subject: Re:Duesberg hypothesis must be rejected
    To: Aubrey Blumsohn

    Aubrey, you said:

    “But certain facts are clear. HIV exists as in
    infectious disease. Mortality rates in (for
    example) South Africa have tripled. Largely due to HIV (untreated). Some
    have colluded from safe western armchairs to prevent
    control of this crisis by piling misinformation”

    Aubrey. I am glad that from your very own western armchair and your own fat
    American salary that you have concluded that the problems in poverty
    stricken Africa are due to the out of control and oversexed Africans
    spreading HIV.

    What a pure JOY it would now be for me to see you spend the next years of
    your life squatting in a vastly overpopulated Soweto ghetto, taking care of
    5 screaming malaria ridden infants who are playing in the mosquito filled
    sewage ditch beside your shack, while having no food, no job, no future, no
    clean water, and no income, diagnosed with the curse of HIV, and wishing you
    were dead, while every day hundreds more refugees from the even more poverty
    stricken countries surrounding you fatten up this ghetto even more. In the
    last 20 years, the population of the poverty stricken Soweto Ghetto’s has
    more than quadrupled!

    I would like to see just how long you, Aubrey, will remain fat, well, and
    healthy yourself in such squalid and filthy conditions.

    What kind of a person, let alone a damned well educated doctor, believes
    that people living in such a way are going to be healthy?

    What kind of a doctor thinks that throwing a lifelong prescription of slow
    death and poisoning by a lifelong prescription of chemotherapy is the
    solution?

    Are you, Aubrey, also now to be considered an advocate of genocide and
    extermination for poverty stricken Blacks in Africa?

    The South Africa Department of Health has claimed every year for the last 7
    years that fully 80% of ALL REPORTABLE DISEASE in the country of South
    Africa is Tuberculosis.

    There are 70 PROVEN FACTORS that have been proven to cause HIV antibody
    tests to BLOW FALSE POSITIVE, including both TUBERCULOSIS and MALARIA at
    the top of the lists. http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/cjtestfp.htm

    The tests seem to be going off pretty much anytime there is an intense
    antibody response in the body.

    So next time you are sitting in your own cushy armchair, Dear Aubrey, eating
    your crumpets and drinking your tea, blaming all the worlds ills on HIV, you
    might want to consider how healthy you yourself would be while living a life
    that is stressed to the breaking point in that squalid ghetto. And ponder
    for a moment how thankful you would be to see Dr. Aubrey come to town and
    give you a diagnosis of being a leperous and socially cursed HIV positive.
    And how thankful you would be to be taking a good dose of toxic bitter
    drugs
    to be washed down with polluted water to fill your long empty stomach and
    soon be the cause your death so you will suffer this life of horror and
    starvation in this ghetto no longer.

    Maybe you need to get the hell out of your own armchair Aubrey, and wake the
    hell up!!!

    Michael Geiger

  6. Michael Says:

    Maybe we all need to WAKE THE HELL UP!

  7. MartinDKessler Says:

    Hi Michael, Two things, How is this proposed website different from this and serveral other sites : Virusmyth, HIV/AIDS Skepticism (Dr. Henry Bauers’s site), Albeta Reappraising Aids (David Crowe’s) , etc. The “scientists” running the establishment like Fauci and Gallo have to die (unassisted of course) first before the science can advance. The more major articles in popular press like Celia Farber in Harpers and Peter Duesberg in Discovery, which gives them credibility and that those who actually read those articles aren’t so dumb, the bandwagon may be eventually dismantled. The Merck vaccine trial failure was the biggest kick in the teeth the establishment has gotten as well as the confession by the WHO about the non heterosexual spread of AIDS into the general public. Lack of funding will kill the establishment.

    Second, Robert Gallo(w) had a “homerun” patent the first time as well – the so-called HIV antibody test. I think he’s gotten very rich from that one. It almost seems that his test was either an incredible coincidence or planned from the start (which I believe).

  8. Michael Says:

    Hello Martin, I think you will be able to find out the answer to your questions soon enough. But for now, can we just appreciate and understand the following words:

    ANTHONY FAUCI and THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY OF GENOCIDE

  9. Michael Says:

    Martin. You, perhaps wishfully said: “Lack of funding will kill the establishment”. That is very true, but you are DREAMING if you think such is presently the case! Todays New York Times:

    June 21, 2008
    Editorial
    A Global AIDS Campaign Stalled
    A handful of Republican senators is blocking action on a bill that would greatly increase American funding to combat AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria around the world. If their delaying tactics succeed, the United States will lose considerable leverage in trying to persuade other advanced nations to contribute substantially more money to fight against global disease at the upcoming meeting of the Group of 8 industrial nations.

    That will undermine the Bush administration’s leadership in combating the global scourge of AIDS. It is long past time for President Bush himself to get engaged in breaking this legislative impasse. He should press the Republican leadership and seven recalcitrant Republican senators to cooperate in an orderly and expeditious vote, unencumbered by a filibuster or the introduction of myriad amendments designed to eat up time.

    The House passed its version of the bill in April by a 308-to-116 vote that had bipartisan support and an endorsement from the White House. It would authorize spending $50 billion over the next five years to combat AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, a big increase from the $19 billion spent in the first five years of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and much more than Mr. Bush had requested. The added money is needed to treat or care for millions more people infected with H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS; to provide prevention services to tamp down the AIDS epidemic; and to expand the campaigns against malaria and tuberculosis.

    Unfortunately, the Senate’s version of the bill, which was approved by the Foreign Relations Committee in a 18-to-3 vote, has bogged down in procedural uncertainties. A group of seven Republican senators, led by Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, has placed a hold on the bill unless their concerns are met. They contend that the $50 billion spending level is irresponsible, and they object to the elimination of a previous requirement that 55 percent of the AIDS money be spent on treatment as opposed to prevention or other services.

    These objections are unpersuasive. Even a $50 billion American contribution over five years matched by substantial contributions from other industrialized nations would not finance all the treatment and prevention programs needed to quell the epidemic. The real issue is how wisely the money is spent. Mr. Coburn wants to ensure that the bulk of the American money goes for treatments that will save lives. But earmarking a specific percentage of funds to be spent on particular activities hampers the flexibility and effectiveness of the program, according to both the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences and the Government Accountability Office. One of the most promising prevention measures, circumcision of males, is apt to be very expensive, and it would be a shame if it got insufficient support simply because an arbitrary percentage of the program’s budget had to be spent on treatments.

    The bill is currently stalled because Senate leaders seem reluctant to bring it to the floor absent an agreement that would limit debate and expedite a vote. Some advocacy groups that don’t like specific provisions would prefer to wait for a new president and Congress. But no one can be sure that, in a faltering economy, there will still be bipartisan support for a $50 billion bill next year. It would be best to pass the bill in time to strengthen the president’s hand at the G-8 summit in early July.

  10. Michael Says:

    You are dreaming that SS HIV has somehow fallen. Please do not delude yourself on this issue!

    ANTHONY FAUCI and THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT ARE GUILTY OF GENOCIDE

  11. Michael Says:

    By the way Martin, All that is necessary for the triumph of evil…
    … is for good men to do nothing.

    if you are for some reason in a state of apathy, meaning, feeling helpless and hopeless about sinking the SS HIV/AIDS, and are as yet, still unable to believe that there is anything that can be done to derail this, please do not waste your own time, or ours, at the new site.

    It is for those who are willing to be DOERS and willing activists, not talkers. Many of us have decided that we have talked about it all quite more than enough.

    Those who are of such a state of mind of “Can and Will Do” are welcome, but, and no offense meant, we have no need of being brought down by anyone with beliefs in their own imaginary apathetic impotency, if that is where your present state of mind is at.

    There is much that can yet be accomplished by massive emailings, harassments, charges filed, marches, stand-ins, maybe even a rock through a few windows, or who yet knows what.

    However, Unless one is willing to join in the DOING that needs to be done, it is probably best to simply leave the rest of us to our well meaning plans and intentions.

  12. Truthseeker Says:

    Michael, a moment’s thought: surely the lesson from Francisco Pizarro’s success is that one does not confront an 80,000 man army directly with only 120 men, one slips through to the HQ preferably by invitation and then takes advantage of the situation to garrott the leader of the enemy with a simple cord.

    To conquer modern systems one needs to use intelligence and clever ideas and operate at the top not the bottom. Murder is not an option, but the principle is the same as in Pizarro’s day – or as Shakespeare repeatedly showed.

  13. Michael Says:

    TS, I couldn’t agree more! One thing is for sure. We dissidents are HIGHLY Intelligent and commited people, and we WILL FIND A WAY!

  14. Michael Says:

    OR, we could just kick back and eat twinkies, and wait it all out.

    So, I ask you all? Would everybody prefer to wait until the now 71 year old Peter Duesberg, who first blew the whistle on this issue, and who has battled it himself bravely for 20 plus years, is dead and gone?

    Some people, like the founding patriots and 50,000 dead revolutionary war soldiers, who were willing to put their own lives on the line so you could all live in a supposedly free country with supposedly Freedom, Justice, Equality, and Dignity for all, at least had some balls.

    It is amazing how ungrateful some people can be to our past, in as little as they are personally willing to do or to sacrifice to keep freedom and Justice and Equality and Human Dignity safe for all of us and all of our loved ones.

    “In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
    And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
    And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
    And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.”

    The HIV AIDS issue IS CRIMINAL. It is A GENOCIDE. It is A HOLOCAUST. It IS the tyranny of our times.

    In my own honest and “humble” opinion, those who are not willing to fight to keep freedom, or to keep human rights, or to fight off and rid the world of the tyrannies of the day, really do not deserve any freedom or justice or equality, and certainly have no dignity or honor, or courage themselves.

    All who know the realities of all of this and all who either do little or nothing to stop it, are to be labeled complete cowards as well as traitors, to themselves and to the entire human race. And all who do know about it and DO NOT do all that can be done to stop it, should be told that they are indeed cowards and traitors to us all.

  15. Truthseeker Says:

    Michael, that is the fifth post urging us all to action, but giving no direction. Surely you have us all mounted, armed, and champing at the bit, but do you wish us to gallop off in all directions at once?

  16. Michael Says:

    Truthseeker, patience is the word for today.

    The slumbering are just awakening, the site will be on the net soon, all will be informed of where, and we will all meet and determine the who, what, where, and when, from there.

    You and all of those noble others, who are to be counted on surely as the good and honorable and heros and righteous spirits of the world today, will find out soon enough.

    The call to join in the coming rally is now in all of your willing and more than able hands.

  17. MartinDKessler Says:

    Did you see the front page of the NY Times Thursday 26 jun 08? The article : “Push in Bronx For H.I V. Test for All Adults” says that the push for testing in the Bronx is because it “has a far higher death rate from AIDS than any other borough.” This is not good. All testing will do will come up with more positive results which will lead to more use of the poisonous ARV’s which will result in more death – of course they will be attributed to AIDS just like the other deaths in the Bronx which were more than likely the cause of the ARVs. Of course this will be a boon for the pharmaceutical manufacturers.
    Governmental beauracracies will keep this going for a long time.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 354 access attempts in the last 7 days.