HIV Does NOT Cause AIDS

“If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document.” - Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for invention of PCR test

 

I am quite thoroughly convinced that the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is, like ADHD, an invention of Big Pharma. I believe that because of the scientific facts surrounding the issue. In 1984, the “cause of AIDS” was announced at a Press Conference by the Reagan White House, via Dr. Robert Gallo. Why did they bypass the scientific facts? No presentation, written paper or study has ever shown conclusively that HIV causes AIDS. Ever since then a group of censored scientists has questioned this hypothesis.

 

Dr. Kary Mullis is a Nobel Prize-winning American biochemist, author, and lecturer. In recognition of his invention of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique he shared the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Michael Smith and earned the Japan Prize in the same year. He very adamantly states that HIV absolutely does not cause AIDS.

 

“...I recognized that I did not know the scientific reference to support a statement I had just written: 'HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.' Of course, this simple reference had to be out there somewhere. There had to be a published paper, or perhaps several of them, which taken together indicated that HIV was the probable cause of AIDS. There just had to be. I did computer searches, but came up with nothing. I was going to a lot of meetings and conferences as part of my job. I got in the habit of approaching anyone who gave a talk about AIDS and asking him or her what reference I should quote for that increasingly problematic statement, 'HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.' After ten or fifteen meetings over a couple of years, I was getting pretty upset when no one could cite the reference. I didn't like the ugly conclusion that was forming in my mind: The entire campaign against a disease increasingly regarded as a twentieth-century Black Plague was based on a hypothesis whose origins no one could recall. That defied both scientific and common sense. Finally, I had the opportunity to question one of the giants in HIV and AIDS research, Dr. Luc Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute, when he gave a talk in San Diego. It would be the last time I would be able to ask my little question without showing anger, and I figured Montagnier would know the answer. So I asked him. With a look of condescending puzzlement, Montagnier said, 'Why don't you quote the report from the Centers for Disease Control?' I replied, 'It doesn't really address the issue of whether or not HIV is the probable cause of AIDS does it?' 'No,' he admitted, no doubt wondering when I would go away. He looked for support to the little circle of people around him, but they were all awaiting a more definitive response, like I was. 'Why don't you quote the work on SIV?' the good doctor offered. 'I read that too, Dr. Montagnier,' I responded. 'What happened to those monkeys didn't remind me of AIDS. Besides, that paper was just published only a couple of months ago. I'm looking for the original paper where somebody showed that HIV caused AIDS.' This time, Dr. Montagnier's response was to walk quickly away to greet an acquaintance across the room.”[1]

Peter H. Duesberg, Ph.D. is a professor of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California, Berkeley. He isolated the first cancer gene through his work on retroviruses (keep in mind that HIV is supposedly a retrovirus!) in 1970, and mapped the genetic structure of these viruses. Professor Duesberg partnered with Dr. Robert Gallo for cancer research, and they were friends for a long time. His cancer research got him elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1986. He was also the recipient of a seven-year Outstanding Investigator Grant from the National Institute of Health. In 1987 he claimed that HIV is not the cause of AIDS.

 

“It was Dr. Peter Duesberg who first threw down the gauntlet in 1987 to challenge the huge and growing industry around the 'HIV causes AIDS' theory when he published a paper in the Journal of Cancer Research. He pointed out that; HIV does not destroy immune system T-cells in laboratory petri dishes, none of the 150 chimpanzees injected with HIV have AIDS, the growing number of HIV negative AIDS cases (now over 4,000 documented), only two percent of HIV positive hemophiliacs have AIDS symptoms, the same percentage as HIV negative hemophiliacs, that AZT (at that time the most expensive and only drug approved for HIV infections) was a known toxin with documented side effects which were attributed to AIDS, and that nearly every AIDS patient was known to be a frequent user of hard drugs.” - Stephen Simac

 

Professor Duesberg states that there is no scientific evidence for the HIV/AIDS hypothesis and says that HIV is in fact biochemically inactive rendering it harmless. He also points out that HIV is not behaving (spreading out into the population) as any contagious virus would. His scientific papers challenging the HIV/AIDS hypothesis have appeared in journals worldwide including Journal of AIDS, AIDS Forschung, Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapeutics, Research in Immunology, Cancer Research, The New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, The Lancet, British Medical Journal and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. His conclusion is that AIDS is caused by long-term recreational drug use and/or HIV drugs themselves (the “treatments”) such as AZT, which destroy the immune system. The drug companies have refused to engage in scientific debate with Duesberg and the mainstream scientific community has pretty much ostracized him. For 23 years, before his first published paper questioning the HIV/AIDS hypothesis, he never had any funding requests turned down. Since that paper came out he gets turned down for funding requests all the time. And of course, his long-time friend, Dr. Robert Gallo, has disowned him.

 

Pardon me but it seems that something fishy is going on here. Something here stinks. Dr. Kerry Mullis, the man who invented the PCR test searched for over two years for a simple report on why it is believed that HIV/AIDS and he never found anything. When he questioned one of the top people in the field, Dr. Luc Montagnier, he was ignored. Professor Peter Duesberg has not only been ostracized from the scientific community, he has been refused every time he offers to discuss the science regarding HIV/AIDS. If there is adequate evidence that HIV causes AIDS then why would they refuse debate? If they have conclusive proof then why not jump all over the opportunity to present it to the public? If Professor Duesberg is wrong, if HIV really does cause AIDS and if the science proves it, then what are they afraid of? And why refuse his funding requests all of a sudden?

 

Dr. Mullis and Professor Duesberg are very prominent people in the world of science, every bit as prominent as Dr. Robert Gallo himself, and they have many valid points regarding this issue. They have questions that have never been answered and they have facts that cannot be denied or ignored. I personally have six reasons why I believe that HIV does not cause AIDS:

 

1► The live HIV virus has never been isolated from HIV/AIDS patients nor has it ever been photographed: HIV has never been isolated from the body of a human being. Period. Not the active virus, anyway. What has been done is this: They have found the inactive HIV “virus” in body tissue, not in the blood, and then used a long, drawn out, complicated chemical process to reactivate it. Take note of what Professor Duesberg said. He stated that HIV is an inactive virus and is harmless. It is! I have seen no evidence that he's mistaken!

 

“Up to today there is actually no single scientifically really convincing evidence for the existence of HIV. Not even once such a retrovirus has been isolated and purified by the methods of classical virology.” - Dr. Heinz Ludwig Sanger, Emeritus Professor of Molecular Biology and Virology, Max-Planck-Institutes for Biochemistry, Munchen

 

Question: If HIV is a contagious virus then why hasn’t it been isolated from the blood of a patient? It should be a very simple procedure, if HIV is what they claim it to be, after all they can do that with every other contagious virus.

 

Also, they have never photographed HIV in the blood of a human being with an electron microscope. Ever! Don’t you find that a bit disturbing?

 

“This embarrassing lack of electron microscope evidence for substantiating the nature of the so-called viral load in AIDS patients was first reported during an important AIDS conference that took place in Pretoria, S.A., in May 2000. None of the AIDS experts present at that conference could demonstrate the presence of retroviral particles in the blood of AIDS patients. Moreover, almost two years ago, a substantial award ($100,000) was officially offered to anybody who would demonstrate HIV particles in the blood of allegedly high viral load patients. Two years later, the award has still not been claimed.”[2]

 

2► The tests for it are about as accurate as a coin toss and the package inserts say that they are “not intended to detect the presence of a virus.” The tests have never been approved by the FDA as an accurate method to determine HIV infection. Many factors (too many to list) such as pregnancy, flu, malnutrition, hepatitis, MS, measles, pneumonia, antibiotic damage, Epstein Barr virus, glandular fever, malaria, syphilis, and over 50 other conditions can bring up false positive results.

 

“A diagnosis of 'HIV+' is like a diagnosis of 'Yes, he's breathing.'” - Liam Scheff, author of Official Stories

 

Coming up positive on an HIV test is simply not what most people believe it is, it has nothing to do with AIDS.

 

“So-called 'HIV tests' have not been proven to detect infection by HIV (human immunodeficiency virus, a retrovirus) even though for more than a quarter century these tests have been widely used to diagnose such infection. Manufacturers of the test kits do not claim that the tests detect infection. The tests are for and were approved only for screening blood, where sensitivity rather than specificity is the prime criterion and false positives are of relatively little concern. Technical discussion of how to detect HIV infection makes plain that in themselves the tests are insufficient to diagnose infection. In point of fact, 'positive HIV' tests may be the result of dozens of such conditions as hyper gamma, anemia, tuberculosis, vaccination against influenza, receipt of tetanus immune globulin, or even pregnancy.” [3]

 

Read the fine print (on the “test” kit inserts):

 

ELISA Antibody Test insert: “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence and absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood.” (No way to determine if HIV antibodies are in the blood? Huh?)

 

Western Blot “Confirmatory” Test insert: “Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosing HIV-1 infection. Positive blot results using any specimen type should be followed with additional testing.” (This is the “confirmatory” test? What the?)

 

Amplicore 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.” (This test is not intended to confirm the presence of the virus?)

 

PCR Genetic Test insert: “Not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection.” (This test is not intended to confirm the presence of the virus?)

 

bDNA Genetic Test insert: “Not intended for use as a screening assay for HIV infection or as a diagnostic test to confirm the diagnosis of HIV infection.” (This test is not intended to confirm the presence of the virus?)

 

Ok, so where is the real test then? The reason that the manufacturers put these disclaimers on their shady tests is simple; if someone tries to sue them all they would have to do is show them the package insert and flip them off. The tests are not designed to look for or find HIV and the test inserts admit that in the fine print but “doctors” still use them to tell people that they are infected with HIV and will soon get AIDS and die! Isn't that just fucking incredible? With something as critical as HIV/AIDS, don't you agree that they should test for the virus itself or at the very least be certain that the virus is in the blood stream before they tell people that they are going to die? When people are diagnosed with HIV they start dying right on the spot, quite literally, whether they have a disease or not, it's an incredibly emotional situation for them. Many people diagnosed as HIV+ commit suicide. Imagine being told that you have an incurable, deadly disease and that you're going to die. Just imagine that! And then take a look again at what it says on those test inserts and try to convince me that it's ok! If it were you would you trust the diagnosis, knowing what you now know about those bullshit tests?

 

As it is, they’ve never even pulled the live virus from the blood of a patient or even seen it under a microscope! How could this be a contagious virus if it can’t be detected or proven to be in the blood of a patient?

 

There have been many cases where people take an HIV test more than once, even several times, only to get differing results! First they're positive, and then they're negative, and then they're “inconclusive” and then they're positive again! In other cases people move from one state to another state and go from being HIV+ to being HIV- just because of a new geographic location!

 

“I don’t recommend people ever get tested [for HIV]. The reason is, I don’t know what the tests mean...no one else knows what the tests mean.” - Robert Da Prato, MD, HIV Testing Specialist, US Army

 

3► As already mentioned above, there is not a single study to prove that HIV causes AIDS; not even from Dr. Robert Gallo, the “discoverer” that HIV causes AIDS. Dr. Luc Montagnier, Gallo’s partner in the HIV/AIDS scam has since admitted in 1989:

 

“We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will get rid of the virus in a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.” He also said: “HIV is not capable of causing the destruction of the immune system which is seen in people with AIDS.”

 

Dr Robert E. Wilner, author of the book The Deadly Deception: The Proof That Sex And HIV Absolutely Do Not Cause AIDS even injected himself with HIV+ blood several times on television to support his claims and continued to test HIV- for many years after that until he eventually passed away from natural causes.

 

4► Diagnosing AIDS is purely unscientific based upon a list of characteristics that changes all the time and differs from country to country. You can have AIDS in the USA but if you go to Canada you will not because they have a different definition. They diagnose many people without even doing HIV tests right here in America. Many people who get diagnosed aren’t even sick, they have a healthy immune system, etc. but then get diagnosed with full blown AIDS. AIDS is not a virus, it is a syndrome! If you are HIV+ and you get pneumonia, they call it AIDS. If you are HIV- and you get pneumonia, they call it pneumonia. The same can be said for 28 other conditions that have existed long before the term “AIDS” was coined. The most basic definition of AIDS is that your immune system is compromised. This is nothing new. The only thing new about it is the term “AIDS.” Millions of people have died in history from compromised immune systems and many of them had one of the 29 listed conditions, they just didn’t call it “AIDS.”

 

In Africa people don’t have much food or clean water, they don’t have the most basic medicines, and they live in very unsanitary conditions. Of course people are going to get sick! Of course their immune systems will be compromised! They don’t have anything they need! And then when they get sick the “doctors” don’t even test their blood, they just say “Oh it must be AIDS.” And there is your reason for the “AIDS epidemic” in Africa. It’s not AIDS! It’s the same thing that has been happening there for hundreds of years only they didn’t call it AIDS! Give those people clean water, food and more sanitary conditions and then watch the “AIDS epidemic” as well as many other diseases go away! Remember what I said back in the vaccines section, as sanitation improves so does human health, it's a no brainer. It's not rocket science, it's called common sense.

 

5► The # 1 killer of HIV+ people is HIV “treatment” not AIDS! The toxic drugs they are given which break down the immune system are the number one killer! The drug AZT was invented as a chemotherapy drug that proved to be so deadly toxic that the FDA wouldn’t approve its use for human beings. It was later put through a bogus trial and even though 169 of the 172 trial participants died they approved it anyway to give to HIV/AIDS patients. What a great scam! Tell people they're dying from a disease that destroys the immune system and then prescribe them with drugs that destroy the immune system! When they get sick and die just blame it on AIDS! And just look at how much money they make selling those drugs! The profits just keep rolling on in!

 

“The most toxic drug that has ever been licensed for long term consumption in the free world. AZT is a prescription drug and according to the manufacturer itself it causes symptoms that are indistinguishable from AIDS. So I would say it is not arrogant for me to say that AZT is AIDS by prescription.” - Professor Peter Duesberg

 

AZT was passed out like candy to tens of thousands of healthy people who were diagnosed HIV+ with those shady tests and then the AIDS death rate, which had been declining suddenly started going up again. Gee, I wonder why? A journalist by the name of Celia Farber posed the following questions to a representative of Glaxo, the company that manufactures AZT:

 

“I just want to know your perspective. If I were to say to you, that it seemed clear to us all in the late 80s, that people were dying very rapidly from high dose AZT – not from 'AIDS' but from high dose AZT, I mean 1200 mg, 1000 mg, and so forth, the early years...if I were to say that as a statement of fact, that high dose AZT was killing gay men outright in those years, would you think I was wrong?”

 

The Big Pharma rep's answer was:

 

“Of course not. You'd be right. Why do you think we lowered the dose?”

 

After the dosage was officially lowered, the death rates from AIDS suddenly plunged back down to almost, but not quite, the same rates as before AZT was introduced. What an odd coincidence! In July 2002 researchers at the 14th World AIDS Conference revealed that the leading cause of death among HIV+ Americans was AZT:

 

“Ninety-four percent of all AIDS-related deaths in the US occurred after the introduction of AZT,” according to CDC statistics through the year 2000.

 

Here is an actual AZT label: