WHAT REALLY CAUSED AIDS: SLICING THROUGH THE GORDIAN KNOT
Posted by Henry Bauer on 2008/02/20
The hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS fails to explain the demographic characteristics of HIV-positive tests (The Origins, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory); it has generated a large number of conundrums and claims that cannot be reproduced (for example, as to herpes, circumcision, vaccines—see HERPES AND HIV, 8 February 2008). Virions of HIV have never been isolated from HIV-positive people. Nor has the hypothesis led to satisfactory answers to salient questions:
1. Why did AIDS appear first among gay men in the United States?
2. Why in the late 1970s to early 1980s?
3. Why did it manifest in the specific forms of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, candidiasis, lymphadenopathy, and Kaposi’s sarcoma?
Dissent from HIV/AIDS theory has persisted for some two decades, but the dissidents agree only over the inadequacy of that theory; no consensus has formed over a possible alternative among a number of suggestions: drug abuse; multifactorial—a combination of many insults including a variety of infections and antibiotic treatments; undiagnosed syphilis. None of those offer convincing answers to those three questions. And dissidents have an additional question to answer:
4. If HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, why do antiretroviral drugs sometimes make people feel much better, quite quickly? (even if that benefit doesn’t last, and the drugs themselves cause harm in the longer run).
Drug abuse evidently has something to do with AIDS.
John Lauritsen was first to point out that all the early AIDS patients had a history of using “recreational” drugs and that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention obscured the fact through its misguided “hierarchical” classification of AIDS cases. Lauritsen also argued cogently for nitrites, “poppers”, as the specific cause of Kaposi’s sarcoma (http://paganpressbooks.com/jpl/POPPERS.HTM).
Peter Duesberg has gathered considerable supporting evidence for the role of drug abuse, including different manifest infections associated with different drugs .
Still, acknowledging an association with drug abuse leaves unanswered those same three questions. After all, there had been an epidemic of drug abuse, not restricted to gay men, in the 1960s to 1970s. Then, and also in more recent times with cocaine, crack, and meth, certain consequences deleterious to health are well known—but they did and do not prominently feature Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia or candidiasis.
The multifactorial hypothesis, too, lacks convincing answers for the specificity of the affected group, when it was affected, and what the manifest infections were.
The inability to offer good explanations for these specifics may well be a major reason why the dissidents’ sound arguments against HIV/AIDS theory have been so little attended to. It’s one thing to show that some theory is inadequate, but it’s a well known aspect of science that an unsatisfactory theory is not abandoned until a better alternative becomes available. Non-scientists, too, can only shrug helplessly when they are shown how obvious the evidence is that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS; they need, quite reasonably, to be given at least plausible answers for what caused AIDS and what “HIV” is.
After my book was published, I learned a great deal more from people who got in touch with me, and yet more after I began writing this blog. The most striking discussion that was new to me, something that gave me a “Eureka” moment, came from Tony Lance, whose explanations offer satisfactory answers to all four of those central questions. What we now know as “AIDS” had been described at first as “GRID”: Gay-Related Immune Deficiency. It turns out that it should have been named Gay-Related Intestinal Dysbiosis:
[In Internet Explorer (and maybe some other browsers, but not in Opera), RIGHT-CLICK and choose “Open in a new tab” or “Open in a new window”, or you may not be able to return easily to the blog entry. If you left-click, the pdf file may replace the blog entry in the open window and “Back” on the browser may not return to it]