How “AIDS Deaths” and “HIV Infections” Vary with Age — and WHY
Posted by Henry Bauer on 2008/09/15
According to orthodox HIV/AIDS belief, antiretroviral treatment has greatly extended the lifespan of “HIV-positive” individuals. It follows that the ages at which people typically die of “HIV disease” should have increased since AIDS was first noted in the early 1980s. Yet the greatest risk of dying “from HIV disease” remains just about the same as it was two decades ago: around age 40 ± 5 years. There is no sign that antiretroviral drugs have extended life.
Another shibboleth of HIV/AIDS theory is that infection by HIV is followed by a latent period averaging 10 years before symptoms of illness present themselves; and this pre-symptomatic period is supposed to have been lengthened by contemporary antiretroviral treatment. It follows that the ages at which people die from “HIV disease” should be much greater than the ages at which they become “infected”. Yet the ages at which people most often test “HIV-positive” are the same as the ages at which people are most likely to die of “HIV disease”, in the range of 40 ± 5 years. There is no indication of a latent period, nor that antiretroviral drugs have extended it.
There are dramatic differences in frequency of testing HIV-positive between members of different racial groups: black >> Native American > white > Asian. There are similarly dramatic differences, of similar magnitude, in the respective death rates. Yet the variations with age are incongruous: blacks survive HIV/AIDS disease to significantly greater ages than do whites, Native Americans, or Asians. An infectious disease that targets some racial groups more than others also allows members of the most affected groups to survive longer?!
I first noted these points in a blog [“HIV disease” is not an illness, 19 March 2008], and later in a talk to the Society for Scientific Exploration (“Disproof of HIV/AIDS theory”). A journal article making these points has now been published (“Incongruous age distributions of HIV infections and deaths from HIV disease: Where is the latent period between HIV infection and AIDS?”, Journal of American Physicians & Surgeons 13 [#3, Fall 2008] 77-81). The data showing that “HIV infections” peak in the same age range as deaths from “HIV disease” are in Table 5 of the journal article and Table E of the blog post:
and a graphical representation is in the PowerPoint presentation:
It is an additional curiosity that the greatest risk of dying from an infectious disease should be for people who are in prime years of adulthood — infections are typically most dangerous for the very young and for the elderly, those for whom childhood vaccinations and flu and pneumonia vaccinations are most recommended.
In the limited space of the journal article and the limited time of an oral presentation, I had to leave unaddressed a number of complications and corollary points, which I’ll address in subsequent posts, for instance, that the age of first recorded positive HIV-test is not the same as the age of first becoming HIV-positive.
Perhaps the most interesting and consequential fact is that the age distributions for positive HIV-tests, for AIDS diagnoses, and for HIV/AIDS deaths all peak in this age range of about 35-45 and have roughly the same shape. That makes no sense under HIV/AIDS theory, but makes perfect sense if “HIV-positive” is merely a response to some non-specific physiological challenge. The concordance of these three age distributions, over the course of more than two decades, follows from the manner in which HIV tests were designed and from the fact that AIDS was defined in terms of “HIV”.
This entry was posted on 2008/09/15 at 9:16 am and is filed under antiretroviral drugs, HIV and race, HIV as stress, HIV does not cause AIDS, HIV tests, HIV varies with age, HIV/AIDS numbers. Tagged: age distribution of AIDS deaths, age distribution of HIV tests, no benefit from antiretroviral drugs, no HIV latent period. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.