Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's Up (or Down) with AIDS?
Canada Free Press ^ | Saturday, February 18, 2006 | Michael Fumento

Posted on 02/18/2006 10:36:18 AM PST by Anne_Conn

It’s a testament to something — well — not good, that 19 years after I first started debunking the "we’re all at risk" theory of HIV/AIDS there are still those who insist that contagious diseases must follow political ideologies. And they’re not shy about fabricating numbers to shoehorn them into the politically correct fit.

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: aids; fumento; hiv; statistics; stds

1 posted on 02/18/2006 10:36:20 AM PST by Anne_Conn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Anne_Conn

AIDS is the Billion $ "Valley of Fatigue" or, "Five O'Clock Shadow" disease.


3 posted on 02/18/2006 10:54:17 AM PST by poetknowit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn; All

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.


4 posted on 02/18/2006 10:59:49 AM PST by Rick_Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn
Its nature's way of telling you somethings wrong.
5 posted on 02/18/2006 11:00:25 AM PST by Mulch (tm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative
AIDS, like environmentalism and racism is BIG BUSINESS!

Yep.

When my brother was getting his masters at U. Minnesota at the St. Paul
(agricultural) campus, he had to go to the med school over in Minneapolis
for some technical assistance.
He ended up collaborating with a researcher (gay) who also was making $$$ on AIDS.

The guy visited Germany every summer to see one set of his grandparents.
And the real irony was that his German grandfather was an SS killa' in WWII.
I guess gramps decided the Reich killed enough gays in WWII.
6 posted on 02/18/2006 11:08:48 AM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn
Medical epidemiology is not meant to be a political tool. Its purpose is to tell us the extent of sickness and death from a given cause and to define the risks. If homosexuals are the prime risk group, that fact must be stated as plainly as saying that only infants get SIDS and that runners and other athletes are the prime risk group for shin splints.

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.

7 posted on 02/18/2006 11:17:13 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VOA
I guess gramps decided the Reich killed enough gays in WWII.

It is a myth that the NAZIs singled out homosexuals for extermination.

8 posted on 02/18/2006 11:30:45 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (Peace Begins in the Womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

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.


9 posted on 02/18/2006 11:44:56 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler
It is a myth that the NAZIs singled out homosexuals for extermination.

True.
They were just one of many groups targeted for persecution.
10 posted on 02/18/2006 12:02:15 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn

"The day statistics became politically incorrect was a dark one for us all."


Bout says it all. PC kills. Truth saves lives.


11 posted on 02/18/2006 12:03:14 PM PST by gidget7 (Get GLSEN out of our schools!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

"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."



*Magic Johnson*


12 posted on 02/18/2006 12:04:01 PM PST by canuck_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: canuck_conservative
*Magic Johnson*


Maybe not the best example.... :)
13 posted on 02/18/2006 12:06:39 PM PST by P-40 (http://www.590klbj.com/forum/index.php?referrerid=1854)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn

Funny `cuase it`s true:

http://www.moviewavs.com/cgi-bin/moviewavs.cgi?Team_America_World_Police=aidssong.wav


14 posted on 02/18/2006 12:07:35 PM PST by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael
10% heterosexual by sex.

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.

15 posted on 02/18/2006 12:08:11 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Tagline removed by Moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn
Debunking the "We're all at risk?" Hell, you're not even close. HIV does NOT cause AIDS and AIDS is NOT a sexually-transmittable disease. You missed the boat pal. This is the biggest homosexual con-job ever foisted on the public.

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!

16 posted on 02/18/2006 12:18:45 PM PST by Doc Savage (Of all these things you can be sure, only love...will endure.......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn

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

390

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 (1–7)**. 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

HIV-free people.

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

T-cells (1–3).

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 (9–15)!

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 (16–20, 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 “5–10 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

5–10 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 WHO’s 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 1×2–1×4% 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 (32–34), 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

391

Table 4.

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 Kaposi’s 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 (36–38). Thus

AIDS is not contagious (39, 40).

14. Viral AIDS – like all viral/microbial epidemics in the past

(41–43) – 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 (41–43), 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 25–50% (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

random.


17 posted on 02/18/2006 12:28:56 PM PST by Doc Savage (Of all these things you can be sure, only love...will endure.......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doc Savage

So, we've been paying them to martyr themselves this whole while?


18 posted on 02/18/2006 12:38:43 PM PST by Old Professer (Fix the problem, not the blame!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Anne_Conn

AIDS would have been cured by now, if not for the bulk of the "research" dollars being diverted to promoting the homosexual agenda.


19 posted on 02/18/2006 12:44:39 PM PST by G Larry (Only strict constructionists on the Supreme Court!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

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.

20 posted on 02/18/2006 12:47:51 PM PST by Rick_Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

A straight man may have a lot sex and never get Aids, but he'll definitly get another STD, if not protected.


21 posted on 02/18/2006 1:10:02 PM PST by Rick_Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: VOA
They were just one of many groups targeted for persecution.

Actually, they generally weren't one of persecuted groups.

22 posted on 02/18/2006 11:13:46 PM PST by Jeff Chandler (Peace Begins in the Womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VOA
They were just one of many groups targeted for persecution.

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.

23 posted on 02/18/2006 11:38:57 PM PST by Jeff Chandler (Peace Begins in the Womb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VOA

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.


24 posted on 02/18/2006 11:50:13 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
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.

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.

25 posted on 02/19/2006 12:03:20 AM PST by freedumb2003 (American troops cannot be defeated. American Politicians can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson