Henry Bauer
Darin BrownAbout
HENRY BAUER’S HIV/AIDS SKEPTIC SITE
Official reports and peer-reviewed publications afford many reasons for skepticism about the prevailing dogma that HIV causes AIDS: Why have many HIV-positive people remained healthy, without treatment, for upwards of 2 decades? Why have more than 20 years of effort seen no progress toward a vaccine against HIV? Why, so often, do drug treatments that seem to destroy virus (decrease “viral load”) and to strengthen the immune system (increase CD4-cell counts) fail to improve the patients’ health? Why do mothers transmit HIV to their babies through breastfeeding less efficiently when breastfeeding is exclusive than when it is supplemented by formula? How can Africa’s population have been increasing so much for twenty years–about 3% per year–when it is supposedly in the grip of a deadly epidemic of AIDS during which few people have been receiving treatment?
The purpose of this blog is to examine such issues and to show that what is puzzling for people who believe that HIV causes AIDS is readily explainable under alternative views soundly based on published research studies.
Data from HIV testing show that what those tests detect is not an infectious agent: see my book (cover shown in the left sidebar), The Origins, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory (McFarland 2007). The book further shows that numbers of positive HIV-tests do not correlate with numbers of reported cases of AIDS, so that “HIV” (whatever HIV tests detect) cannot be the cause of AIDS.
Part II of the book explains how medical science can go wrong about such matters; and Part III describes how things did in fact go wrong about HIV and AIDS.
Reviews of the book are posted at www.failingsofhivaidstheory.homestead.com/Reviews.html.
For more about the author, see his homepage. If you want to correspond via my e-mail address there, please understand that I can only respond if the e-mail address you give is a valid one. For example, e-mails cannot be delivered to “anonymous@anonymous.com”.
You should be able to subscribe to RSS Feeds either under “Meta” or under “Subscribe” in the right-hand sidebar.
Thursday, 29 November 2007 at 4:29 pm
Congratulations!
Go ahead!
Leo
Thursday, 29 November 2007 at 6:11 pm
Henry,
I was just tipped off to your blog by a poster on msn’s AIDSTheMythExposed message board.
Thanks, I will probably read your commentary each day.
Jeff Sullivan, MSW
Friday, 14 December 2007 at 2:36 pm
Hello,
I am interested in signing up to receive updates and to be able to post comments - please add me to your RSS / email list.
I am a 5.5 year “survivor” of receiving the “news” “HIV POS” and am PERFECTLY HEALTHY and Med-free…
Thanks for your blog!
Glenn
Friday, 14 December 2007 at 8:50 pm
Glenn:
I’m new at this and just learning the ropes.
You can comment on any of the posts by clicking “Comment” and then filling out the registration details, after which you should be able to sign in whenever you want to comment, using your chosen ID and password.
Your query made me look into “RSS feeds” for the first time. I found that I could subscribe to feeds by using Google Reader. The Google page has “more” on the top line at the right, clicking that gives a list including Reader. Click on that and a page comes up with a left sidebar that includes “Subscription”. Click on that and search for “hivskeptic”. That should bring up my blog. After that, you should be able to see new items whenever you open Google Reader. You may need to create a Google account, but it’s free–and very useful, I’ve been using Google Alerts for some time to keep up with news on several topics.
I do appreciate your interest, and the information you shared, and I’m grateful to you for making me finally start to learn about RSS feeds!
Monday, 30 June 2008 at 8:56 am
I was just wondering where I can find your “20 questions” page, Iwould like to see the comments.
Are any of the dissidents actively researching the causative agents of AIDS?
Monday, 30 June 2008 at 11:00 am
Evelcyclops:
I haven’t yet put together an “FAQ” page, I agree that it would be useful.
I think the best explanation for what caused the original 1980s AIDS is:
Kaposi’s sarcoma caused by poppers, see John Lauritsen’s “Death Rush”: http://paganpressbooks.com/jpl/POPPERS.HTM
PCP pneumonia and candidiasis were brought about by wholesale destruction of the intestinal microflora that protect us from fungal infections, see Tony Lance’s hypothesis of “intestinal dysbiosis”, see WHAT REALLY CAUSED AIDS: SLICING THROUGH THE GORDIAN KNOT, 20 February 2008, http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/02/20/what-really-caused-aids-slicing-through-the-gordian-knot/
Wednesday, 2 July 2008 at 3:02 pm
“PCP pneumonia and candidiasis were brought about ”
In this case, a simple test by using a synbiotic supplemented diet under controlled conditions could help to either falsify or ‘prove’ the hypothesis.
What can be said about the effect of HAART therapy on recovery of T cells in infected individuals? These drugs are directed at particular proteins in the HIV virus which restrict the ability to reproduce and so if there is discord wether HIV exists/has no effect, then why do these figures stack up? (Hans J. J. van der Vliet et al. The Journal of Immunology, 2006, 177: 5775-5778 )
As for Kaposi’s sarcoma as a result of poppers, have you any references to any peer reviewed studies? And what is your explanation for the widespread KS rates amongst HIV+ individuals in Africa?
The average life expectancy in countries such as botswana and south africa decreased rapidly after 1983/4 and have continued to decrease ever since. If AIDS in africa is caused by poor sanitation and malnutrition, then why was this suddenly so prevalent so suddenly, in what can be described as consistent livig conditions?
Wednesday, 2 July 2008 at 3:28 pm
Re synbiotic diet, see Tony Lance’s “Gay-related intestinal dysbiosis” in WHAT REALLY CAUSED AIDS: SLICING THROUGH THE GORDIAN KNOT, 20 February 2008,
http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/02/20/what-really-caused-aids-slicing-through-the-gordian-knot/
The literature on HAART is vast and I can’t summarize it for you.
Re KS, read “Death Rush”, as I suggested. Haverkos published peer-reviewed articles and reports on nitrites as likely cause of KS in gay men in USA. KS in Africa is a different matter, and there’s no evidence that it has increased in the “AIDS” era.
The population in Africa, including Botswana and South Africa, has increased steadily during the “AIDS” era (see CIA Fact Book, for example). Please cite reliable sources for your allegation re reduced life expectancy.
Thursday, 3 July 2008 at 4:07 pm
RE KS in africa, i have just done a small search on scopus, and ive found a few artivles that refute your claim about a lack of evidence regarding KS in africa:
Sitas F, Incidence of histologically diagnosed cancer in South Africa, 1993–1995. National Cancer Registry of South Africa. (1998 )
This article describes a 3 fold increase in an already prevalent disease from 1988-1996 and suggests that this figure is still rising.
F Sitas. Kaposi’s Sarcoma in South Africa. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, No. 28, 1-4, 2000
References a 20 fold increase in KS in uganda and zimbabwe in the past 10-15 years.
If we can already assume these diseases were already endemic and and infection rates of KSHV were stable, then what can explain the sudden rise in infection rate other than AIDS caused by HIV?
Apologies for lack of reference regarding the life expectancy, the data was sourced from the 2005 Economic Report of the (US) President which logged annual rates of life expectancy from 1958 - 2003… roughly speaking it shows a 20% decrase in life expectancy for botswana, zimbabwe, and South Africa and kenya with slightly lower, but still significant decreases, roughly 15-17% decreases.
A good reference on this subjest is; “The impact of AIDS on adult mortality: Evidence from national and regional statistics. Blacker, J. 2004 AIDS 18 (SUPPL. 2), pp. S19-S26
As for the CIA factbook, i have heard a similar argument from another dissident, and to be honest, i need a reference for this before i can press the issue, as i have seen articles reffering to slowing population growth. However it must be said, that HIV infection does not prevent procreation sadly, and it may be a valid argument to suggest that once a victim has been diagnosed, knowing that they will have a vastly reduced life expectancy, they may wish to forfill their maternal duties (if you will). The stigma of condom use and poor education and rampant procreation that is a crude, but signifacant factor in this equation although i believe the population growth is decreasing.
I cite: AIDS and population growth in sub-Saharan Africa: Assessing the sensitivity of projections. Heuveline, P. Population Research and Policy Review 16 (6), pp. 531-560 which i think adresses your point quite well, with acceptance that population growth is indeed remaining positive with some good explainations.
also, the conclusion of; AIDS, population growth shape sub-Saharan Africa’s future. 1998 Population today 26 (1), pp. 1-2 is pretty good…
I didnt quite mean for this to be so long, but you know how it is, once you get researching…
Thursday, 3 July 2008 at 7:24 pm
Evelcyclops:
“RE KS in africa, i have just done a small search on scopus, and ive found a few artivles that refute your claim about a lack of evidence regarding KS in africa:”
I didn’t say lack of evidence, I said it’s an entirely different matter
Please do look at CIA Fact Book and other sources. How can an increase in population be squared with decreased life expectancy?
With apologies, I now discontinue these exchanges. I simply don’t have the time, I’m absolutely swamped in trying to keep up with the issues that I regard as central, and the ones you raise are—in my opinion—not. There are innumerable questions that are simply not answerable because the research has not been done or reported, since everything is approached with the HIV = AIDS viewpoint.
But the evidence is absolutely clear that what HIV tests detect is not infectious, see Part I of my book. Chapter 9, moreover, shows clearly that “HIV” and “AIDS” numbers are not correlated. All the data are from official reports and peer-reviewed articles.
Most recently I saw that the age distribution of “HIV Disease” deaths has remained unchanged from 1987 through 2004, peak age of death being around 40: therefore, no increase in life expectancy of HIV+ people as a result of antiretroviral treatment including HAART; and the age distribution for testing HIV+ superposes on the age distribution of HIV+ deaths, thus there is no sign of the latent period that is a central holding of HIV/AIDS theory: see “HIV DISEASE” IS NOT AN ILLNESS, 19 March 2008
http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/03/19/“hiv-disease”-is-not-an-illness/
and http://failingsofhivaidstheory.homestead.com/SSE2008.ppt
The points you have been raising are along the line, “But if HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, how do you explain….”
As I said above, there are innumerable such questions that one could ask and that are not answerable—except speculatively—because the data needed to be sure about them have not been gathered or published. They will no doubt be answered, if need be, once it is generally accepted that something not infectious, and not correlated with “AIDS”, cannot be the cause of AIDS.
Friday, 4 July 2008 at 7:52 am
Evelcyclops,
The aetiology of KS is an interesting topic. Although it may not be central to Prof. Bauer’s general line of argument, it is certainly pertinent. but I think we would all be more inclined to concern ourselves with your questions if you could be persuaded to stick to one topic at a time and put a little more work and thought into it than simply Googling and throwing bits and pieces at us in the form described by Prof. Bauer above:
“But if HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, how do you explain…?”
As you will know, it’s A LOT less work asking such a quesion than answering it, so let’s restrict ourselves a bit, shall we? The general familiarity with the HIV/AIDS topic demonstrated in your mails suggests that you are quite capable of this.
But let me give you an example of what I mean. You write
“This article describes a 3 fold increase in an already prevalent disease from 1988-1996 and suggests that this figure is still rising.
F Sitas. Kaposi’s Sarcoma in South Africa. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, No. 28, 1-4, 2000
References a 20 fold increase in KS in uganda and zimbabwe in the past 10-15 years.
If we can already assume these diseases were already endemic and and infection rates of KSHV were stable, then what can explain the sudden rise in infection rate other than AIDS caused by HIV?”
Evelcyclops, here is what the CDC says about KS, KSHV and HIV:
“The etiology of KS is complex, but infection with human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8 ) appears to be the primary and necessary event for development of the tumor (6). The sequence of the HHV-8 genome suggests several ways the virus might promote uncontrolled cellular proliferation. The virus encodes for several genes, incorporated from its human host, that are homologous to human oncoproteins, including a cyclin that regulates the G1-to-S phase of the cell cycle, and a Bcl-2 like protein that prevents apoptosis (6). In addition, HHV-8 encodes for functional chemokines that may promote angiogenesis and inhibit immune type I helper-T-cell responses. Early in the development of a KS lesion, large numbers of inflammatory cells are recruited to the site, and their production of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 and TNF-alpha are thought to promote the angioproliferative inflammation that characterizes the disease.
However, HHV-8 infection alone is not sufficient for the development of KS, and epidemiologic evidence supports the contribution of other environmental, hormonal, and genetic cofactors in the pathogenesis of the condition. For instance, co-infection with HIV dramatically increases the risk for development of KS, as does the immunosuppressive therapy required by organ transplant patients. Because KS is more prevalent in men than women, sex hormones have also been postulated to act as cofactors in the pathogenesis of the disease”
In other words, nobody is really sure about anything other than there appears to be certain correlations. Viruses are mentioned as cofactors, so is the environment, hormones, genes. . . It’s all in the mix. Now I have a question for you: Which of these many cofactors would explain that KS incidence has risen only three-fold in South Africa, the country supposedly hardest hit by HIV/AIDS, while it has risen twenty-fold in Uganda and Zimbabwe?
Once you have answered this and similar questions, from the inexhaustible store of paradoxes, inconsistensies and discrepancies generated by the HIV/AIDS explain-all, maybe we can fruitfully return to your question concerning which factors other than HIV could explain the supposedly increased incidence of KS in Africa.
Saturday, 5 July 2008 at 3:55 pm
To MacDonald;
The reason i ask what if not HIV, is because it is the mainstream view, im sorry, but i happen to hold the belief that HIV causes AIDS.
How do you mean viruses are mentioned as co-factors? Do you mean what are the co-factors to the infections?
As for why the discrepancy in rates, first of all, it is arguable to say RSA has been the hardest hit, certainly one of the hardest, but it may be down to several key issue. Quality of data handling and correct diagnosis. I accept that if there was a significant enough discrepancy in the figures it may reduce the efficacy of the argument.
It could also be that HHV8 infections were more prevalent in RSA to start with, and less common in in the other countries although im sure there is plenty of data in the literature to back up or falsify. I’d try to find it, but im away from my network computer at the minute, and i only have a basic access to journals, mostly on fungus
Saturday, 5 July 2008 at 5:20 pm
Nobody can prevent you from arguing any view you choose — yet. The AIDS-establishment is trying very hard, so maybe some day. . .
But in the meantime you don’t have to aspire to their standard of argument.
The absolutely first thing you must do is take care at all times to distinguish clearly between infection and disease/clinical symptom. HIV is ranked as a co-factor not in infection but in the clinical manifestation of KS. Not long ago, it was thought that HIV was a primary, possibly sufficient, cause of KS. That view has reluctantly been abandoned because KS tumors didn’t yield any traces of the HIV molecular signature despite Roman efforts by Gallo and others to tease it out.
But since the First Cause of all things MUST be a virus, they kept hunting and found that KS tumors reliably express at least fragments of the HHV-8 molecular signature. Post hoc(us pocus), there’s surely the cause of KS! Unfortunately, it has also proved impossible to establish HHV-8 as a sufficent cause of KS, so, just as with HIV, everything becomes a co-factor to preserve the core myth of Viral Causation.
Regardless of whether the scientists are on the right track or not — who can tell in each case? — this is the inevitable pattern the narrative will follow each and every time. But with the advent of the lenti-viruses and immune-deficiency viruses, something was added: viruses are now each other’s co-factors. So for example herpes facilitates HIV, and HIV facilitates herpes. HIV even facilitates itself; its mere presence creates the conditions that facilitate its presence. It is a perfect viral Ouroboros myth, and as with all myths, it holds a core of truth clothed in multiple layers of superstition.
Sunday, 6 July 2008 at 8:51 pm
I know an old lady who swallowed a lie
I don’t know why she swallowed the lie
Perhaps she’ll die
I know an old lady who swallowed a germ
That managed to hide out a very long term
She swallowed the germ to match the lie
But I don’t know why she swallowed the lie
Perhaps she’ll die
I know an old lady who swallowed a pill
What a thrill to swallow a pill
She swallowed the pill to kill the germ
That managed to hide out a very long term
She swallowed the germ to match the lie
But I don’t know why she swallowed the lie
Perhaps she’ll die
I know an old lady who swallowed more pills
Made her ill. To swallow more pills.
She swallowed the pills to aid the pill
She swallowed the pill to kill the germ
That managed to hide out a very long term
She swallowed the germ to match the lie
But I don’t know why she swallowed that lie
Perhaps she’ll die
I know an old lady who swallowed ad hoc
What a crock to swallow ad hoc!
She swallowed ad hoc to match the pills
She swallowed the pills to aid the pill
She swallowed the pill to kill the germ
That managed to hide out a very long term
She swallowed the germ to match the lie
But I don’t know why she swallowed that lie
She’s going to die
I know an old lady who dismissed the horse(sh*t)
She’s alive and well of course!