Skip to comments.What's Up (or Down) with AIDS?
Posted on 02/18/2006 10:36:18 AM PST by Anne_Conn
Its a testament to something well not good, that 19 years after I first started debunking the "were all at risk" theory of HIV/AIDS there are still those who insist that contagious diseases must follow political ideologies. And theyre not shy about fabricating numbers to shoehorn them into the politically correct fit.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
AIDS is the Billion $ "Valley of Fatigue" or, "Five O'Clock Shadow" disease.
10% heterosexual by sex. A little more by drugs/blood transfers/etc...although it really is mostly a gay disease, if you look at the numbers.
Hear, hear! A hundred years from now when the political enthusiasts are all dead sane people will be shaking their heads at how politics killed the people it was supposedly protecting.
We all are, to an extent, at risk when a disease of this sort is running rampant, but not nearly to the extent that hysteria would have it. Such things as rape and contamination of blood supplies do not care about the sexual practices of the victim.
But the idea that everyone was equally at risk served only to avoid the notion that passive anal intercourse was the primary vector and male homosexuals the primary (but not exclusive) practitioners. What was plainly at stake were at least three factors - (1) that funding for a disease restricted to an ostracized social group would not be minimized because of the ostracization; (2) that actions intended to prevent the spread of the disease would not be disproportionately aimed at that group, and (3) that the blame for a disease turning into an epidemic would be deflected from that group.
In fact, (1) funding was, in the end, disproportionately and not altogether effectively large for this disease, (2) the bath-houses were not closed until much later and such common public health measures as vector tracking and quarantine were not employed, and (3) the blame for the spread of the disease could not be masked, clouded, or deflected. Fumento's point, and I wholeheartedly concur, is that homosexual men were the ones who paid dearly for this triumph of politics over common sense and good medical procedure. Blaming the thing on Reagan or the conservatives simply is an aging myth that serves only to propagate the misery.
It is a myth that the NAZIs singled out homosexuals for extermination.
Interestingly, though, a lot of religious fundie types eagerly got on the "everyone is at risk" AIDS bandwagon themselves, because they wanted to terrorize people out of ALL sex outside of marriage.
So it had support from both ends of the political spectrum.
The reality is that a man even having completely unprotected vaginal sex with a dozen new women every night, if he's avoiding women with obvious needle track marks, etc., is exceedingly unlikely to ever contract AIDS.
"The day statistics became politically incorrect was a dark one for us all."
Bout says it all. PC kills. Truth saves lives.
"The reality is that a man even having completely unprotected vaginal sex with a dozen new women every night, if he's avoiding women with obvious needle track marks, etc., is exceedingly unlikely to ever contract AIDS."
Funny `cuase it`s true:
Sources please. It is actually difficult to catch HIV from unprotected heterosexual sex, there has to be blood-borne pathogens or lesions in the genital areas.
Most of the HIV transmissions passed onto women are from bisexual men.
By the way, I recall reading the first Letter to the Editor in the Lancet back in the late 70's reporting the "gay flu". Unless my calendar is off, the earliest reports and cases popped up around 1976-77. Even giving you 1980 as a starting point, that's 26 years ago. What the hell were you doing for the other 7????
Where did all our tax money go you ask? Just look at how that money has propelled the homosexual agenda in this country over the last 25 years. It won't be long and MA will be legalizing homosexual contact with 10 year olds! Oh wait! It's already legal in Quincy!
The chemical-AIDS hypothesis proposes that the AIDS
epidemics of the US and Europe are caused by recreational
drugs, alias lifestyle, and anti-HIV drugs (Duesberg
J. Biosci. | Vol. 28 | No. 4 | June 2003
Peter Duesberg, Claus Koehnlein and David Rasnick
Table 4. The HIV-AIDS hypothesis*: 17 predictions versus the facts.
No. Prediction Fact
1. Since HIV is the sole cause of AIDS, it must be abundant
in AIDS patients based on exactly the same criteria as for
other viral diseases.
But, only antibodies against HIV are found in most
patients (17)**. Therefore, HIV infection is identified in
blood by detecting antibodies, gene sequences, or viral
isolation. But, HIV can only be isolated from rare, latently
infected lymphocytes that have been cultured for
weeks in vitro away from the antibodies of the human
host (8). Thus HIV behaves like a latent passenger virus.
2. Since HIV is the sole cause of AIDS, there is no AIDS in
But, the AIDS literature has described at least 4621 HIVfree
AIDS cases according to one survey irrespective of,
or in agreement with allowances made by the CDC for
HIV-free AIDS cases (55).
3. The retrovirus HIV causes immunodeficiency by killing
But, retroviruses do not kill cells because they depend on
viable cells for the replication of their RNA from viral
DNA integrated into cellular DNA (4, 25). Thus, T-cells
infected in vitro thrive, and those patented to mass-produce
HIV for the detection of HIV antibodies and diag nosis
of AIDS are immortal (915)!
4. Following exactly the same criteria as for other viral diseases,
HIV causes AIDS by killing more T-cells than the body
can replace. Thus T-cells or CD4 lymphocytes . . . become
depleted in people with AIDS.
But, even in patients dying from AIDS less than 1 in 500
of the T-cells that become depleted are ever infected by
HIV (1620, 54). This rate of infection is the hallmark of
a latent passenger virus (21).
5. With an RNA of 9 kilobases, just like polio virus, HIV
should be able to cause one specific disease, or no disease if
it is a passenger (22).
But, HIV is said to be the sole cause of AIDS, or of 26
different immunodeficiency and non-immunodeficiency
diseases, all of which also occur without HIV (table 2).
Thus there is not one HIV-specific disease, which is the
definition of a passenger virus!
6. All viruses are most pathogenic prior to anti-viral immunity.
Therefore, preemptive immunization with Jennerian vaccines is
used to protect against all viral diseases since 1798.
But, AIDS is observed by definition only after anti-
HIV immunity is established, a positive HIV/AIDS test
(23). Thus HIV cannot cause AIDS by the same criteria
as conventional viruses.
7. HIV needs 510 years from establishing antiviral immunity
to cause AIDS.
But, HIV replicates in 1 day, generating over 100 new HIVs
per cell (24, 25). Accordingly, HIV is immunogenic, i.e. biochemically
most active, within weeks after infection (26, 27).
Thus, based on conventional criteria for other viral disea ses,
HIV should also cause AIDS within weeks if it could.
8. Most people with HIV infection show signs of AIDS within
510 years the justification for prophylaxis of AIDS with
the DNA chain terminator AZT (§ 4).
But, of 34×3 million . . . with HIV worldwide only 1×4%
[= 471,457 (obtained by substracting the WHOs cumulative
total of 1999 from that of 2000)] developed AIDS in 2000,
and similarly low percentages prevailed in all previous years
(28). Likewise, in 1985, only 1×2% of the 1 million US citizens
with HIV developed AIDS (29, 30). Since an annual incidence
of 1×21×4% of all 26 AIDS defining diseases combined is no
more than the normal mortality in the US and Europe (life ex pectancy
of 75 years), HIV must be a passenger virus.
9. A vaccine against HIV should (is hoped to) prevent
AIDS the reason why AIDS researchers try to develop an
AIDS vaccine since 1984 (31).
But, despite enormous efforts there is no such vaccine to
this day (31). Moreover, since AIDS occurs by definition
only in the presence of natural antibodies against HIV
(§ 3), and since natural antibodies are so effective that no
HIV is detectable in AIDS patients (see No. 1), even the
hopes for a vaccine are irrational.
10. HIV, like other viruses, survives by transmission from host
to host, which is said to be mediated through sexual contact.
But, only 1 in 1000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits
HIV (3234), and only 1 of 275 US citizens is HIV-infected
(29, 30), (figure 1b). Therefore, an average un-infected
US citizen needs 275,000 random sexual contacts to get
infected and spread HIV an unlikely basis for an epidemic!
(Table 4. Cond.)
J. Biosci. | Vol. 28 | No. 4 | June 2003
The chemical bases of the various AIDS epidemics
No. Prediction Fact
11. AIDS spreads by infection of HIV. But, contrary to the spread of AIDS, there is no spread
of HIV in the US. In the US HIV infections have remained
constant at 1 million from 1985 (29) until now (30), (see
also The Durban Declaration and figure 1b). By contrast,
AIDS has increased from 1981 until 1992 and has declined
ever since (figure 1a).
12. Many of the 3 million people who annually receive blood transfusions
in the US for life-threatening diseases (51), should have
developed AIDS from HIV-infected blood donors prior to the
elimination of HIV from the blood supply in 1985.
But there was no increase in AIDS-defining diseases in
HIV-positive transfusion recipients in the AIDS era (52),
and no AIDS-defining Kaposis sarcoma has ever been
observed in millions of transfusion recipients (53).
13. Doctors are at high risk to contract AIDS from patients, HIV
researchers from virus preparations, wives of HIV-positive
hemophiliacs from husbands, and prostitutes from clients
particularly since there is no HIV vaccine.
But, in the peer-reviewed literature there is not one doctor or
nurse who has ever contracted AIDS (not just HIV) from the
over 816,000 AIDS patients recorded in the US in 22 years
(30). Not one of over ten thousand HIV researchers has contracted
AIDS. Wives of hemophiliacs do not get AIDS (35).
And there is no AIDS-epidemic in prostitutes (3638). Thus
AIDS is not contagious (39, 40).
14. Viral AIDS like all viral/microbial epidemics in the past
(4143) should spread randomly in a population.
But, in the US and Europe AIDS is restricted since 1981
to two main risk groups, intravenous drug users and male
homosexual drug users (§ 1 and 4).
15. A viral AIDS epidemic should form a classical, bell-shaped
chronological curve (4143), rising exponentially via virus
spread and declining exponentially via natural immunity,
within months (see figure 3a).
But, AIDS has been increasing slowly since 1981 for 12
years and is now declining since 1993 (figure 1a), just like
a lifestyle epidemic, as for example lung cancer from
smoking (figure 3b).
16. AIDS should be a pediatric epidemic now, because HIV is
transmitted from mother to infant at rates of 2550% (44
49), and because 34×3 million people worldwide were already
infected in 2000. To reduce the high maternal transmission
rate HIV-antibody-positive pregnant mothers are
treated with AZT for up to 6 months prior to birth (§ 4).
But, less than 1% of AIDS in the US and Europe is pediatric
(30, 50). Thus HIV must be a passenger virus in newborns.
17. HIV recognizes no social, political or geographic borders
just like all other viruses.
But, the presumably HIV-caused AIDS epidemics of
Africa and of the US and Europe differ both clinically and
epidemiologically (§ 1, table 2). The US/European epidemic
is highly nonrandom, 80% male and restricted to
abnormal risk groups, whereas the African epidemic is
So, we've been paying them to martyr themselves this whole while?
AIDS would have been cured by now, if not for the bulk of the "research" dollars being diverted to promoting the homosexual agenda.
67% homosexual/drug+homosexual activity. 8% heterosexual sex. 23% drug activity. So the chances of getting aids and being heterosexual are significantly low in comparison. This is only America, though. That was my context.
A straight man may have a lot sex and never get Aids, but he'll definitly get another STD, if not protected.
Actually, they generally weren't one of persecuted groups.
I retract my previous post. Yes, they were eventually targeted for persecution, but they could in most cases renounce their homosexual nature and escape persecution. They were not a major concern for the Nazis, and they were not shipped off to the death camps because of their homosexuality. Being Jewish or being a communist would most definitely get one shipped off to die, queer and straight alike.
Wrong. Homosexuals were never targeted for persecution, what to speak of extinction. Only a few thousand were incarcerated; and many of those were political enemies and some not even homosexual. Many Nazis themselves were homosexuals, including a not insignificant number of camp guards and directors.
Homosexuals as a group were not targeted for persecution. Read up on real history, not gay propaganda revisionist history.
You reverse the problem statement. I am a married monogamous heterosexual. So is my wife. Neither of us uses illicit drugs of any kind.
The only chance of our getting AIDs is through some sort of blood transfer. I know it happens, but I think with modern screening, my chances of getting bad blood, even assuming I need it, is a million to one. Figure in the chance I will even need blood and my chances of getting AIDS is closer to zero than getting killed in an airplane crash (I fly weekly).
Gays, druggies and bed jumpers don't have that assurance.
AIDS is a lifestyle disease. Why we suck money away from other diseases that are NOT lifestyle diseases, such as MS, Cancer (except for smoking), etc. is a conundrum.