Wednesday, June 18, 2008

AFRICA





African AIDS..Who has it?


AIDS in AFRICA over estimated


Pharmaceutical Drug dealers in Africa


A Virus Invades The Mind

Africa @ Virus Myth.com

Africa..increase in population

The census results showed that the population of South Africa increased from 40,5 million in 1996 to 44,8 million in 2001. The Community Survey has returned an estimated population of 48,5 million, showing an overall increase of 8,2% since 2001.
The above figures are based on the new boundaries.
The largest percentage/rate of increase in population between 2001 and 2007 was in Western Cape with 16,7%, followed by Gauteng with 13,9%.
Eastern Cape, Free State and North West experienced an increase of less than 5%.


QUESTIONING AIDS IN SOUTH AFRICA - In 2000, the XIII International AIDS Conference took place in Durban, South Africa. Documentary filmmaker Robin Scovill was there, interviewing people on both sides of the question about AIDS, HIV, and the anti-retroviral medications that President Mbeki was refusing to allow into his country. You may be shocked to hear what Dr. Mark Wainberg, President of the International AIDS Society, wants to do with anyone who questions whether HIV actually causes AIDS, and what he has to say about Dr. Peter Duesberg, once the world's leading retrovirologist. This is a 20-minute preview of the one-hour film. For more information, or to purchase the complete video, please go to Alive & Well AIDS Alternatives.

THE BIG QUESTION - The Big Question is a one-hour TV program in South Africa, featuring a heated debate between Dr. David Rasnick and Professor Sam Mhlongo against two spokesmen for the AIDS Establishment. The topic is the efficacy of anti-retroviral drugs. Near the beginning, reporters are interviewing people in South Africa on both sides of the issue, and perhaps the most striking thing is to notice how sick those who are taking the ARVs look (from lipodystrophy, one of the side-effects of the drugs), and how well and healthy the people look who are not taking the drugs. "It never made sense that when people are sick to treat them with toxic chemicals." Help For HIV

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

AIDS [was] over for 2 days



Threat of world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits

A 25-year health campaign was misplaced outside the continent of Africa. But the disease still kills more than all wars and conflicts

By Jeremy Laurance
Sunday, 8 June 2008


Photobucket

A quarter of a century after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.


In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations may have been misdirected, Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. 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.

Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries. 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. But we have to be careful. As an epidemiologist it is better to describe what we can measure. There could be small outbreaks in some areas."

In 2006, the Global Fund for HIV, Malaria and Tuberculosis, which provides 20 per cent of all funding for Aids, warned that Russia was on the cusp of a catastrophe. An estimated 1 per cent of the population was infected, mainly through injecting drug use, the same level of infection as in South Africa in 1991 where the prevalence of the infection has since risen to 25 per cent.

Dr De Cock said: "I think it is unlikely there will be extensive heterosexual spread in Russia. But clearly there will be some spread."

Aids still kills more adults than all wars and conflicts combined, and is vastly bigger than current efforts to address it. A joint WHO/UN Aids report published this month showed that nearly three million people are now receiving anti-retroviral drugs in the developing world, but this is less than a third of the estimated 9.7 million people who need them. In all there were 33 million people living with HIV in 2007, 2.5 million people became newly infected and 2.1 million died of Aids.

Aids organisations, including the WHO, UN Aids and the Global Fund, have come under attack for inflating estimates of the number of people infected, diverting funds from other health needs such as malaria, spending it on the wrong measures such as abstinence programmes rather than condoms, and failing to build up health systems.

Dr De Cock labelled these the "four malignant arguments" undermining support for the global campaign against Aids, which still faced formidable challenges, despite the receding threat of a generalised epidemic beyond Africa.

Any revision of the threat was liable to be seized on by those who rejected HIV as the cause of the disease, or who used the disease as a weapon to stigmatise high risk groups, he said.

"Aids still remains the leading infectious disease challenge in public health. It is an acute infection but a chronic disease. It is for the very, very long haul. People are backing off, saying it is taking care of itself. It is not."

Critics of the global Aids strategy complain that vast sums are being spent educating people about the disease who are not at risk, when a far bigger impact could be achieved by targeting high-risk groups and focusing on interventions known to work, such as circumcision, which cuts the risk of infection by 60 per cent, and reducing the number of sexual partners.

There were "elements of truth" in the criticism, Dr De Cock said. "You will not do much about Aids in London by spending the funds in schools. You need to go where transmission is occurring. It is true that countries have not always been good at that."

But he rejected an argument put in The New York Times that only $30m (£15m) had been spent on safe water projects, far less than on Aids, despite knowledge of the risks that contaminated water pose.

"It sounds a good argument. But where is the scandal? That less than a third of Aids patients are being treated – or that we have never resolved the safe water scandal?"

One of the danger areas for the Aids strategy was among men who had sex with men. He said: " We face a bit of a crisis [in this area]. In the industrialised world transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men is not declining and in some places has increased.

"In the developing world, it has been neglected. We have only recently started looking for it and when we look, we find it. And when we examine HIV rates we find they are high.

"It is astonishing how badly we have done with men who have sex with men. It is something that is going to have to be discussed much more rigorously."

The biggest puzzle was what had caused heterosexual spread of the disease in sub-Saharan Africa – with infection rates exceeding 40 per cent of adults in Swaziland, the worst-affected country – but nowhere else.

"It is the question we are asked most often – why is the situation so bad in sub-Saharan Africa? It is a combination of factors – more commercial sex workers, more ulcerative sexually transmitted diseases, a young population and concurrent sexual partnerships."

"Sexual behaviour is obviously important but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

Low rates of circumcision, which is protective, and high rates of genital herpes, which causes ulcers on the genitals through which the virus can enter the body, also contributed to Africa's heterosexual epidemic.

But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said.

"The impact of HIV is so heterogeneous. In the US , the rate of infection among men in Washington DC is well over 100 times higher than in North Dakota, the region with the lowest rate. That is in one country. How do you explain such differences?"


Photobucket

but AIDS just can't be over,There is big money at stake


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.


June 18th update

"Global AIDS Epidemic Far From Over"

The United Nations Secretary-General Mr. Ban Ki-moon presented the report on progress in implementing the 2001 Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS and the 2006 Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS.


If people cannot see through this corrupt paradigm, then everyone must be lost.

Nancy Padian chasing waterfalls..

Heterosexual Transmission of HIV & the Nancy Padian Evasion



Many of us point to the Padian et al. study as a starting point reference to help explain this.

It is about the heterosexual transmission of HIV in Northern California. The results from a ten-year study.


1. It was the longest and largest epidemiological study of heterosexual tranmission of HIV (1986-1996);

2. For 10 years, it followed 175 discordant couples, who had a lotta sex. "Discordant" means for each couple, 1 person was HIV+, and one was not.

3. So, obviously, if you're gonna have lots of sex with an HIV+ person, you're gonna get the virus, get AIDS and die, right?

4. After 10 years, the scientists found NO seroconversions.

5. The couples who used condoms, did not transmit the virus.

6. The couples who failed to use condoms, did not transmit the virus.

7. The couples that exclusively engaged in vaginal intercourse did not transmit the virus;

8. In fact, 39% of the couple engaged in anal sex -- they too did not transmit the virus. [recap by B.Carter]



 


The following correspondence was conducted with Professor Padian:


"As far as I can judge, your data does not prove that HIV is heterosexually transmitted. Am I wrong in my interpretation? If so, would you please give me some details why I am wrong."


Professor Padian's response was: "Yes you are wrong. Read the papers. The discussion in very thorough in each."


The follow up correspondence was: "In your publications, you repeatedly pointed out that the data from cross-sectional studies are not reliable. In your 1997 prospective study you "observed no seroconversions...". In your discussion, you also pointed out that "No transmission occurred among the 25 percent of couples who did not use condoms consistently at their last follow-up nor among the 47 couples who intermittently practiced unsafe sex during the entire duration of follow-up." This is the information which led me to come to the conclusion which you have stated is wrong. I would be grateful if you would tell me what information I am missing."


Professor Padian did not respond.


This sequence of events is typical of "HIV" experts. When they are asked initial questions regarding their research, they respond in a patronising manner. Naturally, their response leads to more questions where we "dig deeper". Faced with such questions they refuse to respond.


It is interesting to note that Professor Padian did not talk on "how her own paper is being abused and twisted". She said that "scientists need to be trained as to their responsibility to journalists and their responsibility to make their views known through the public venues as well as scientific venues. …we're working in an anti-science era, and we have our role to play."


Surely, scientists must be aware of their responsibility to journalists but above all as Howard Temin pointed out ''when an experiment is challenged no matter who it is challenged by, it's your responsibility to check. That is an ironclad rule of science, that when you publish something you are responsible for it. . .even the most senior professor, if challenged by the lowliest technician or graduate student, is required to treat them seriously and consider their criticisms. It is one of the most fundamental aspects of science'' (emphasis in original).72


*The Perth Group challenge with Moore* excerpt from RethinkingAIDS.com


The Padian Waffle!


 Results from a Ten year study PDF



AIDS FIGHT IS SKEWED


BY FEDERAL CAMPAIGN


EXAGGERATING RISKS


The Pulitzer Prize Winner 1997

Most Heterosexuals Face Scant Peril but Receive Large Portion of Funds--Less Goes to Gays, Addicts


Rough estimates of the relative risks in the U.S. and Western Europe of various activities that can transmit AIDS. The calculations can't be used as a guide to individual behavior. Risk to any one person depends on many factors that can't be reduced to a single number. Recent research, for example, suggests that the infectiousness of the HIV virus can vary greatly over the life of an infected person; infectiousness is likely to be high both at the very outset of the infection, before symptoms have appeared, and several years later. Also, women may be several times more likely than men to be infected through vaginal intercourse, a distinction that the overall risk figure obscures.



? Photos of HIV ?


Have You ever heard people say that there are Micron Photos of HIV? .. Probably So.

Have You ever googled the internet for Santa Claus? Green Cheese on the Moon? The Tooth Fairy? Big foot? The Stork? Sherlock Holmes?

How bout HIV? The so-called pictures we see are Not "HIV Pics" they are Computer generated "HIV ILLUSTRATIONS"

Google HIV illustrations and HIV pics they are the same thing however none of the illustrations match..and they look the same as the Flu .

Enjoy your Cartoons!

"Health Education AIDS Liaison, Toronto

"





Retroviruses






Do Retroviruses even Exist?

Dr Stefan Lanka






Is there any Proof that HIV Exists?

The Perth Group










HIV the harmless Passenger Virus?

Professor Duesberg






Christine Johnson : On What they Call HIV Isolation










In a 1997 interview, Luc Montagnier spoke about his isolation of HIV. He said, "We did not purify [isolate] ... We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology [shape] typical of retroviruses ... They were very different ... What we did not have, as I have always recognized it, is that it was truly the cause of AIDS."

Robert Gallo hasn't made such large concessions. He has, however, amended his AIDS death sentence. He now believes that it's possible to live with HIV "for 30 years until you die of old age," as long as you live a healthy lifestyle and avoid immune-compromising substances.

In 1994 Gallo quietly announced that the major AIDS defining illness in gay men - Kaposi's Sarcoma, could not be explained by HIV but that nitrite poppers, a drug that had been extremely popular in the gay community, "could be the primary cause." Somehow, this didn't make headlines.

Gallo also said that Peter Duesberg's research into a drug-based AIDS model should be funded. Duesberg's funding has all but evaporated since he publicly challenged the HIV/AIDS model.

The most controversial story you've never heard

FDA & HIV test Manufacturer Facts about HIV Tests

FDA DONOR SCREENING HIV ASSAYS



VIRAL ~ LOAD ~ TEST
Roche Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor Test
Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., Branchburg, NJ

The Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor Test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection



NucliSens HIV-1 QT
bioMerieux, Inc., Durham, NC

The NucliSens HIV-1 QT assay is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV-1 nor is it to be used as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV-1 infection




COBAS AmpliScreen HIV-1 Test, version 1.5
Roche Molecular Systems, Inc, License #1636

This test is not intended for use an aid in diagnosis




Procleix HIV-1/HCV Assay
Gen-Probe, Inc, License #1592

The PROCLEIX® HIV-1 Discriminatory Assay may be used as an aid in the diagnosis of HIV-1 infection.




bioMerieux, Inc, Durham, NC
Vironostika HIV-1 Plus O Microelisa System

The Vironostika HIV-1 Plus O Microelisa System is intended for use as an aid in diagnosis of infection with HIV-1. It is not intended for use in screening blood donors.

Published data indicate a strong correlation between the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) and a retrovirus referred to as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV).1,2





Abbott RealTime HIV-1 Amplification Reagent/Calibrator/Control Kit
Applicant: ABBOTT Molecular, Inc

This assay is not intended to be used as a donor screening test for HIV-1 or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV-1 infection.





COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 Test
Applicant: Roche Molecular Systems, Inc

The COBAS® AmpliPrep/COBAS® TaqMan® HIV-1 Test is not intended for use as a screening test for the presence of HIV-1 in blood or blood products or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV-1 infection.





HIV-1 (Western Blot)
Maxim Biomedical, Inc,

Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosis of HIV-1 infection.







OraSure HIV-1 Western Blot Kit
Epitope, Inc., Beaverton, OR

The OraSure HIV-1 Western Blot Kit is not intended for use with blood, serum/plasma or urine specimens or for screening potential blood donors.

An OraSure sample that is reactive in both EIA screening test and Western blot assay is presumed to be positive for antibodies to HIV-l






MedMira Reveal Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test
Applicant: MedMira Laboratories, Inc, CANADA

The Reveal™ Rapid HIV -1 Antibody Test is intended for use as a point-of-care test to aid in the diagnosis of infection with HIV -1 The Reveal™ Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test is not approved for use to screen donors of blood, plasma, cells or tissues.





Trinity Biotech Uni-Gold Recombigen HIV
Applicant: Trinity Biotech plc, Wicklow, Ireland

Uni-Gold™ Recombigen® HIV is intended for use in point of care settings as an aid in diagnosis of infection with HIV-1






ELISA TESTING

EIA testing alone cannot be used to diagnose AIDS, even if the recommended investigation of reactive specimens suggests a high probability that the antibody to HIV-1 is present.

At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence and absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood.

Therefore sensitivity was computed based on the clinical diagnosis of AIDS and specificity based on random donors.


HIV Testing is approved for "Prognostic" Purposes in Point of care Setting or to be used as an aid in a Diagnosis.


Source


Just In case...


HIV AIDS TESTS DISSENT


Martha Stewart\'s Home Made HIV Test

The Benefits of Anti-Retroviral Drugs


Most People who believe in the phantom HIV {Retrovirus} Say that the Drugs are safe and at most cause diarhea,fever,and mild discomfort. They also say that the Drugs "Save Lives" "Help People Live Longer" and "Prolong Life"


But what do Clinical Trials and The Food and Drug Administration suggest?




Below are the Illnesses "CONSTRUCTED"by the CDC/NIH as "AIDS" that have treatments and causes of their own..and HIV Negative People get these same Illnesses, AIDS is not a single Illness or Disease AIDS is simply a "new" CONSTRUCT for "old" Illnesses.




The CDC defines a case of AIDS as a disease, at least moderately predictive of a defect in cell­mediated immunity, occurring in a person with no known cause for diminished resistance to that disease.
Such diseases include:


* Aphthous Ulcers (Canker Sores)
* Encephalitis
* Aspergillosis
* Candidiasis
* Norcardiosis
* Strongyloidosis,
* Thrombocytopenia (low platelets)
* Cytomegalovirus (CMV)
* Hepatitis C
* Herpes Simplex Virus (oral & genital)
* Herpes Zoster Virus (shingles)
* Human Papilloma Virus ( genital warts)
* Molluscum Contagiosum
* Oral Hairy Leukoplakia (OHL)
* Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy (PML)
* Anal Dysplasia/Cancer
* Cervical Dysplasia/Cancer
* Kaposi's Sarcoma (KS)
* Lymphomas
* Aspergillosis
* Candidiasis (thrush, yeast infection)
* Coccidioidomycosis
* Cryptococcal Meningitis
* Histoplasmosis
* Bacterial Diarrhea
Salmonellosis, Campylobacteriosis, Shigellosis
* Bacterial Pneumonia
* Mycobacterium Avium Complex (MAC)
* Mycobacterium Kansasii
* Syphilis & Neurosyphilis
* Tuberculosis (TB)
* Anal Dysplasia/Cancer
* Cervical Dysplasia/Cancer
* Kaposi's Sarcoma (KS)
* Lymphomas


Click the Name below of each drug and read the PDF file for all
"GOVERNMENT BLACK BOX WARNINGS"
for these Toxic Poisons or scroll down to the WARNINGS Section of the Study and think about it..



Please keep in Mind This is Not Tylenol or Caffeine in a Soda these are Deadly Poisons..


Just Like so called HIV Testing,PCR/Viral Load Testing and CD4(Tcell) Counting.. None of these Drugs are SPECIFIC or Unique to HIV and Most of the Illnesses or diseases spawned by these drugs are REFFERRED TO as "Side Effects" and are either FATAL,SEVERE or UNKNOWN.





AZT Development as cancer drug


Zidovudine was the first drug approved for the treatment of AIDS and HIV infection. Jerome Horwitz finished finalizing the method of synthesis of AZT in 1964, as well as indicates it in this publication in J. Org. Chem, when he describes the best method to obtain the intermediary 5, under a US National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant (Horwitz 1964). Its synthesis is inexpensive and easily performed: AZT was originally intended to treat cancer, but failed to show efficacy and had an unacceptably high toxicity profile.
(Note: There is some dispute over whether a high toxicity profile contributed to the shelving of AZT. Horwitz himself appears to have given conflicting testimony in various interviews.)



* The Original Label of AZT *




The Label reads:
"TOXIC. Toxic by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed. Target organ(s): Blood bone marrow. If you feel unwell, seek medical advice (show the label where possible). Wear suitable protective clothing."







Deadly toxic chemical hazard warning by Sigma Chemical Co. on tiny 25mg bottles of AZT supplied to research laboratories. You obviously don't find this advice on GlaxoSmithKline's AZT label, or in its package insert recommending a daily dose of up to sixty times as much. Or let's face it: who would swallow it?
Notice the Skull and Cross Bones?


AZT
ZIDOVUDINE (AZIDOTHYMIDINE)
RETROVIR


AZT Celibrated ?<BR>

Protease Inhibitors
AGENERASE (amprenavir, APV)

APTIVUS (tipranavir, TPV) APTIVUS

CRIXIVAN (indinavir, IDV) CRIXIVAN
INVIRASE (saquinavir, SQV)
FORTOVASE

KALETRA ( lopinavir/ritonavir, LPV) KALETRA

LEXIVA (Telzir, fosamprenavir, FPV)

NORVIR (ritonavir, RTV)

PREZISTA (darunavir, DRV)

REYATAZ (atazanavir, ATZ)

VIRACEPT (nelfinavir, NFV) VIRACEPT




Combination Drugs
ATRIPLA (efavirenz tenofovir emtricitabine)


3 individual HIV drugs in one (Pill) form


Nucleotide Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors (NRTIs)


COMBIVIR
(zidovudine + lamivudine, AZT + 3TC)

EMTRIVA (emtricitabine, FTC) EMTRIVA

EPIVIR (lamivudine, 3TC) EPIVIR


(Kivexa, abacavir + lamivudine, ABC + 3TC)
Should a doctor advise you to carry a WARNING card for
EPZICOM?


(zidovudine, AZT, ZDV) See Above AZT




(abacavir zidovudine lamivudine)
ABC + AZT + 3TC



(tenofovir DF + emtricitabine)

TDF + FTC

VIDEX (didanosine, ddI) VIDEX


VIREAD (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, TDF)

ZERIT (stavudine, d4T)

ZIAGEN (abacavir, ABC) ZIAGEN

RACIVIR (RCV) RACIVIR

Racivir is an investigational (DRUG) that is not yet approved by the FDA for use outside of clinical trials. It is being studied for the treatment of HIV infection as part of a combination regimen. This medicine does not cure or prevent HIV infection or AIDS and does not reduce the risk of passing the virus to other people.

CLINICAL TRIALS (AMDX, DAPD) AMDOXOVIR

APRICITABINE (SPD754, AVX754)
Apricitabine is an investigational (DRUG) that is not yet approved by the FDA for use outside of clinical trials. It is being studied for the treatment of HIV infection in treatment-experienced patients and has been granted fast-track status by the FDA.

ELVUCITABINE (ACH-126,443, Beta-L-Fd4C)
Elvucitabine is an investigational (DRUG) that is not yet approved by the FDA for use outside of clinical trials. It is being studied for the treatment of HIV infection. Elvucitabine is similar to the FDA-approved anti-HIV drug lamivudine (Epivir)





Immune-Based Drugs

Immunitin (HE2000, alpha-epibromide)
Proleukin (aldesleukin, Interleukin-2, IL-2)
Remune (HIV-1 Immunogen, Salk vaccine)
BAY 50-4798
IR103




Non-Nucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors (NNRTIs)

RESCRIPTOR (delavirdine, DLV) RESCRIPTOR

SUSTIVA (Stocrin, efavirenz, EFV) SUSTIVA




This so called "Life Saving" drug actually insists that its "Life Threatening" and the drug has created some SERIOUS news..
VIRAMUNE (nevirapine, NVP)

*HONEST DOCTOR.org

*DR FISHBEIN "WHISTLE BLOWER"

*Flawed AIDS Drug Study Exposes NIH Misconduct

*Whistleblower Says U.S. Bungled AIDS Study

*Docs Worry AIDS Drug Use May Be Halted

*Lawsuit Filed Over Woman Who Died in AIDS Drug Trial

*OUT OF CONTROL: AIDS and the Corruption of medical Science by Celia Farber

Etravirine (TMC-125)
Rilpivirine (TMC-278)




Entry Inhibitors/ Fusion Inhibitors

Fuzeon (enfuvirtide, ENF, T-20)
Celsentri (maraviroc, UK-427,857)
Vicriviroc (SCH-417690, SCH-D)
TNX-355


Integrase Inhibitors

Isentress (raltegravir, MK-0518)
Elvitegravir (GS-9137)


Maturation Inhibitors
Bevirimat (PA-457)


Cellular Inhibitors
Droxia/Hydrea (hydroxyurea, HU)







All we hear about is the "Lazarus effect," how "AIDS" has become a "manageable disease" (which translates as: don't KILL your "market," just keep them brainwashed, dependent and on the verge of death), and all about the "miraculous" and dramatic drop in annual AIDS deaths in the US, a phenomena which, as you probably already know, preceded the protease inhibitors by several years, so it is totally illogical to give these poisons the credit for this drop.

NO MORE PROTEASE!


The HIV Drugs that you may be taking now (or will probably be pressured into taking if you are newly "labeled" as HIV-Positive) can be, and often are more dangerous than the HIV.
According to a presentation at the AIDS Conference in Barcelona in 2002, more HIV-Positives are dying of Fatal Organ Failure Linked to AIDS Drugs - report from Barcelona AIDS Conference from this report News Bureau UPCM Health System which shows that Better Monitoring of Liver Enzymes Needed For HIV Patients, Pitt Researcher Finds: Related study shows association between HIV drugs,liver cancer and this latest study from the medical journal the "Lancet" HIV treatment and prognosis.


"All 4 classes of antiretrovirals (ARVs) and all 19 Food and Drug Administration-approved ARVs have been directly or indirectly associated with LIFE-THREATENING events and DEATH.">
Grade 4 Events Are as Important as AIDS Events in the Era of HAART



~U P D A T E ~ J A N U A R Y ~ 2 0 0 8

Potentially Life-Threatening and Serious Adverse Events
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Adverse Drug Reactions and Related [FDA]“Black Box Warnings” in Product Labeling for Antiretroviral Agents
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Adverse Effects Compromising Quality of Life and/or With Potential Impact on Medication Adherence

CONDOM NAZI'S,CONDOM$ MANIA! ,SAFE SEX, THE FACTS

The hazardous condom

Posted: September 4, 2001
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Former U.S. Congressman Tom A. Coburn, M.D., ran a tank through the propaganda of condom safety in a recent press release he issued entitled "Safe Sex Myth Exposed by Scientific Report."

The spectacular evidence of condom dangers came from a report co-sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(HHS)The NIH ,the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

The high-ranking scientific panel considered data on only eight of roughly 25 widespread STD's: HIV, chancroid, genital herpes, human papillomavirus (HPV), gonorrhea, syphilis, trichomoniasis and chlamydia.

For decades the CDC, Planned Parenthood, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States and the rest of the sex-education cartel have sworn kids could be safely sexy and confident when rolling on their stylish rubbers. Sure.
The panel reported, however, that after millions of tax dollars were spent for decades of sex-education programs, posters, lectures, plays and documentaries promoting their use, condoms are a toxic STD prophylactic.


Dr. Hal Wallis, a spokesman for the Physicians Consortium of over 2,000 medical doctors and healthcare professionals, noted that the NIH report "proves that abstinence, not condoms, must be the focus of federal health efforts," adding that "the entire public health model developed by the CDC … is a lie."

Dr. Coborn is livid. He charged that the CDC violated the law he authored (Public Law 106-554) compelling all federally-funded organizations to supply "medically accurate information regarding the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of condoms in preventing" HPV and other STDs.

No health agency has released a guesstimate of how many children and adults, operating their condoms by the book, have died based on the health establishment's bogus condom claims.


For, it turns out that while STD infections are a principal cause of women's sterility, chronic disease and early death, condoms afford girls and women categorically no protection from seven of the eight STD's studied, even when used faultlessly 100 percent of the time.


Condoms may curb gonorrhea in heterosexual intercourse – but only for men!
And even the claim that condoms often hinder HIVAIDS is questionable.

Here are a few reasons seldom mentioned:
The scientific panel studied data from several small groups of heterosexual couples, with one partner an AIDS carrier – the longest follow-up study being three years. Allegedly, if condoms are applied without fail in normal vaginal intercourse and N-9 can interrupt the functional barrier provided by the endometrium and, thus, facilitate infection with HIV and other pathogens.

Approximately 15 out of each 100 uninfected partners will get HIV annually.However, there is no information on how often these "couples" actually did the "marital act."

And, for those folks who engage in various sodomies, NIH gave no clues on rates of condom breakage and slippage. So, the data clearly void condom "security" for homosexual participants.
Also relevant, condom safety claims may be killing girls and women en masse. Condoms do not stop genital HPV, the most common STD.

Said Dr. Coborn, "every year, 15,000 cases of cervical cancer are diagnosed and 5,000 women die of the disease. Hundreds of thousands of other women will be diagnosed and treated for pre-cancerous condition. HPV is the cause of nearly all cervical cancer and has also been linked to prostate, anal and oral cancer."

So, sexual disease results from promoting sexual license and concealing condom dangers.

Since 1950, Kinseyan sexuality advocates have promoted the importance of sexual freedom. On that simple-minded basis, American laws were altered to push child "education" in sex, via "safe sex" condom mastery.

But, they lied.

So, hold on to your hats folks. Look for possibly thousands of lawsuits coming down the expressway.

Planned right, these should make the tobacco debacle look like a Victorian ladies tea as teachers, school systems, the CDC, Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, etc., are sued for wrongful death, "false claims," "contributing to the delinquency of minors," and scores of other criminal violations of law.

Since latex condoms can have naturally occurring holes which are at least 500 TIMES LARGER THAN THE SO-CALLED AIDS VIRUS , and since cell-free HIV could be 10,000 times more efficient at vaginal infection then cell-associated, and since each ml of semen potentially contains as many as one million cell-free particles, those who promote condoms have a duty to inform their clients of these facts and that clients have a right to this information which they need before giving consent to use a so called 'health product'.




More Commentary by the Celtic Rebel: "If the Glove doesn't Fit"

"The HIV death cult blatantly ignores the fact that the so called 'bare back' community is far greater than the current POZ community world wide"

Margaret Heckler Said: "We have a blood test for AIDS with a 100% certainty"

Hidden Facts and Dangers of HIV Tests
What's in the Fine Print



Remarkable information about HIV tests including the fact that no HIV test has ever been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the actual diagnosing of HIV infection.

Few doctors, clinics, journalists, or AIDS organizations know that all current HIV tests are approved only as screening tests, prognostic tests (for predicting a possible future outcome) or as "an aid in diagnosis" and are not intended to be used for determining if a person actually has HIV.

The FDA's lack of such approval speaks to the fact that no HIV test can directly detect or quantify HIV or determine the presence of specific HIV antibodies in human blood.

Recent changes in the fine print of the test kits acknowledge this little known data and seem to indicate a change of thought with regard to the role of HIV in AIDS.

From 1984 until last year, test literature contained the very certain statement that "AIDS is CAUSED by HIV." Then in November of 2002, a new test kit started what now seems to be a trend toward rethinking the causal link between HIV and AIDS. It states, "AIDS, AIDS related complex and pre-AIDS
are THOUGHT TO BE CAUSED by HIV." (OraQuick Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test, OraSure Technologies, Inc)

Now it appears we've gone from "HIV is thought to cause AIDS," to something even more uncertain: "Published data indicate A STRONG CORRELATION between the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) and a retrovirus REFERRED TO as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)."

This last quote is found in the package insert for a new ELISA test (Vironostika HIV-1 Plus O Microelisa System) the FDA approved in June 2003.
The entire package insert can be downloaded from

http://www.fda.gov/cber/pma/P020066.htm

According to Alive & Well advisor Dr Rodney Richards, a chemist and co-creator of the very first HIV test, as of June 2003, the number of FDA approved tests that contain the term HIV or LAV (the old school term for the so-called virus) have risen to 36. Of these, 13 have been approved in just the last three years.

Richards points out that "despite the increased number of HIV tests, there is still no manufacturer that claims their test can be used to diagnose infection with HIV. All of the RNA based tests for viral load and genotyping clearly state they are 'NOT intended for use in diagnosing HIV infection.'
Instead of an indication for use in detecting or quantifying the actual virus, these tests are approved only for prognosis or monitoring therapy for people who doctors assume are infected.

Richards is working on a report to clarify what HIV test
manufacturers mean by the terms "prognosis," "monitoring of therapy," and "aid in the diagnosis of HIV." His report will focus on what the tests cannot do (diagnose HIV infection) and what exactly they can.

At first glance, the rapid tests may appear relatively benign since the manufacturers clearly emphasize that "preliminary positives" must be confirmed with follow up testing. This emphasis is due to the fact that the accuracy of the rapid tests is widely known to be more questionable than the already dubious HIV ELISA or Western Blot. But the notion that
medical personnel will await confirmation of results before insisting patients take action is entirely misguided since the true market for rapid tests is pregnant women in labor

Incredibly, the recommendation to misuse rapid tests for women in labor comes directly from the Deputy Commissioner of the FDA himself, Dr. Lester M Crawford. The good doctor says "OraQuick will be a great help in identifying pregnant HIV-infected women going into labor who were not tested during pregnancy so that precautionary steps can be taken to block their newborns from being infected with HIV." (FDA News, November 7, 2002)

These precautionary steps include IV infusion of the toxic chemotherapy AZT during labor, C-section delivery, six weeks of mandatory AZT treatment for the baby regardless of their own HIV status, and orders to the mother not to breastfeed. Even though chemotherapy, surgery and denial of normal
feeding are based on preliminary results from a test never approved for detecting HIV infection, a mother who declines such intervention risks losing custody of her child.

Perhaps more remarkable than official calls for misuse of rapid tests is a disclosure by the manufacturer of the OraQuick that 7% of women with a history of prior pregnancy will score falsely positive on their test. Further, the manufacturer of the newly approved Reveal test didn't even evaluate their product in multiparous women.

Worse still, as Dr Richards points out, the rapid tests may soon be routinely administered to women tested negative before labor. "Based on the erroneous belief these tests can actually diagnose HIV infection, doctors may want to retest women in labor who've previously come up negative just to
be sure they haven't seroconverted in the mean time."

Another lucrative market for the rapid tests is among healthcare workers who experience accidental needle sticks or other unintentional contact with patient fluids. As Richard points out, this opens a Pandora's box of potential life-altering situations.

"Imagine a nurse sticks herself with a used needle. Ora-Sure gives her the impression she can find out quickly if that needle is contaminated with HIV. Should the needle score positive, she would then be urged to start prophylactic chemotherapy right away. Of course, if the needle scores positive, hospitals would most likely feel an ethical responsibility to
inform the patient and to urge them to also start 'saving their lives' with AIDS meds. Since there are 600,000 to 1,000,000 accidental needles sticks in the US annually, this is a huge market for both the test and treatment manufacturers."

The great influence of drug and test manufacturers on public health policy, media presentations and among AIDS activist groups may mean that the hidden dangers of rapid tests will remain unknown.




INTERVIEW RODNEY RICHARDS
Why the "HIV Tests" Can't Tell You Whether You Have HIV

http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/mcinterviewrr.htm








Orthodox HIV AIDS website

N O ~ G O L D ~ S T A N D A R D ?

"The standard algorithm is still in place. Viral load is not an FDA approved test for the diagnosis of HIV infection".



Response from Dr. Holodniy "I cannot answer why testing is not standardized"












FDA approval is for "Prognostic" purposes not a Diagnostic Test..





Factors Known to Cause False-Positive HIV Antibody Test Results you don't need HIV to test(antibody) positive


PDF











MORE ARTICLES ON THE DUBIOUS HIV TESTS




Hidden Facts and Dangers of HIV Tests

























[GRIDS] Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome

Was GRID really banished from the common definition of what was renamed "AIDS" today?

According to the CDC the camoflauge still exists here
"Men who Sleep with Men"(MSM) rather than Homosexual as a generalized term.  Lurking through pages of the CDC website The Terms MSM and Heterosexual are used. Perhaps the CDC blatantly  ignores the fact that Lesbians are homosexual too and HIV transmission in Lesbians is a rare occurence.


THE DENIALIST EXCERCISE

Have you ever bumped into someone that said:


"HIV Does Not Cause AIDS" ?















Did they say something to you that didn't seem plausible or it may even sounded like the person was losing a few marbles??









HIV Doesn't cause AIDS????







Huh?












Here is an Excercise that should ease your Skepticism...










Tools Required:




Your favorite Drink or Beverage




A Bucket of Popcorn(Buttered if you like)




a DVD Player




and about 4 hours of your time...














First Make yourself Comfortable..




then put this DVD in..


























after the Movie take an Intermission.....













Now Put This DVD in..























This Exercise will change the way you think



HIV ? Gay [man's] disease

HIV IS A GAY DISEASE?

REMEMBER THIS (RED)iculous $CAMPAIGN FROM [WITHIN] THE GAY COMMUNITY BACK IN 2006? IT WAS AN OUTRAGE TO BOTH THE HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL COMMUNITY(S)..AROUND THE WORLD.

PEOPLE WERE JUST APPALLED BY SUCH NONSENSE IT WENT AGAINST THE DOCTRINE OF THE 'CHURCH OF HIV' AND IT'S FOLLOWERS...

IT PUBLICLY CAUSED SOME GENEROUS DONATORS TO THE GREAT AID$ RIBBON (swastika) TO CANCEL THEIR MEMBERSHIPS UNTIL THEY TOOK THIS $CAMPAIGN DOWN.

IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN AND WILL NEVER GO AWAY,
IT HAS BEEN A STAIN IN HISTORY AND CAN NEVER BE FORGOTTEN.

THE EVOLUTION OF AIDS HAS BROUGHT US NOTHING BUT CONTRADICTIONS AND LIES.

LOOK AROUND US>> THE (RED) $CAMPAIGN,THE GAY EQUAL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, AND SO MANY OTHER GBLT SUPPORT GROUPS WHO IGNORE THE GRANDIOSE FRAUD PERPETRATED TO GAY MEN AND AFRICANS.
.
THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION HAS DECLARED THAT THERE IS NO MORE REASON TO WORRY ABOUT AIDS, IF YOU'RE HETEROSEXUAL AROUND THE WORLD,UNLESS OF COURSE YOUR SKIN IS BLACK AND YOUR HOMELAND IS AFRICA! THERE IS NO MORE REASON TO WORRY ABOUT AIDS IN THE USA IF YOU'RE A LESBIAN OR HETEROSEXUAL.



THE LEVITICAL LAW WHICH SUPPOSEDLY WAS NAILED TO THE TREE WITH CHRIST HAS BEEN PERVERTED WITH IATROGENOCIDE AND GOVERNMENT INTOLERANCE.


WHEN WILL THE GAY BROTHERHOOD WAKE UP?

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE?

WHEN WILL GAY MEN BEGIN TO REBUKE THE THE HIV LIE?

WHY DO GAY MEN CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE GAY ORGANIZATIONS WHO IN TURN SUPPORT THAT WE ARE A DISEASE AND A PHANTOM VIRUS HAS BEEN MADE IN OUR IMAGE?


GAYS KILLING GAYS!

I'LL CLING TO THIS CLICHE UNTIL SOME OF THE MORE PROMINENT MOVEMENTS OF THE WORLD WIDE HOMOSEXUAL COMMUNITY TAKE A STAND AGAINST THE HIV INDUSTRY..THE HIV DEATH CULT!






Re Thinking AIDS.Com