HIV/AIDS Skepticism

Pointing to evidence that HIV is not the necessary and sufficient cause of AIDS

Italian analysis of HIV/AIDS data

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2009/07/17

Professor Ruggiero has provided some additional information about the recent article in Medical Hypotheses that has caused such a furor.

Two videos on Youtube feature discussions of the thesis (Tesi di Laurea) in medicine and surgery by Dr. Mandrioli at the University of Bologna, one of the oldest universities in the world and one of the most prestigious in Italy. The thesis was judged by eleven of the most distinguished Professors of Medicine at Bologna and received maximum marks cum laude (110/110 e Lode). Dr. Mandrioli will be speaking at the Rethinking AIDS Conference in November in Oakland on “Italian epidemiology supports the chemical AIDS theory” [or “drug-AIDS” hypothesis].

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YUoU4EQYAY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Emarcoruggiero%2Eorg%2Fpapers%2Ehtm&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjvqYRZoBzI&feature=related

Another interesting link is to a blog conducted by a physician, Dr. Fabio Franchi, that is skeptical about HIV/AIDS theory.

http://www.dissensomedico.it/

11 Responses to “Italian analysis of HIV/AIDS data”

  1. Jonathan said

    I can hardly wait for someone to translate all this info from Italian to English. This sound like important information that needs as wide an audience as possible, especially in the U.S., where so much of the AIDS orthodoxy is based. Good thing patience is a virtue, eh? 🙂

  2. demarque said

    I want to add the work of Aquaro et al, whose finding prove undoubtedly that the veritable causes of the presence of the “HIV” markers are chemical.

    Decidedly, the Italians are at the cutting edge.

  3. Demarque:

    Thanks for the link to the Aquaro et al. paper.

    Though I’m not a chemist or microbiologist and thus unable to follow their argumentation, I clearly understand the meaning of a sentence like the one on page 7 of their study:

    “Two different viral isolates of HIV-1 were used in this study.”

    Isolation means to purify a thing from everything that is not this thing. As we all know, this has never been done with “HIV”.

    So, what are Aquaro et al. talking about? What were they working with?

    Why the inflational use of words like “virus”, “viral”, “infection” et al., when the causes for the presence of “HIV”-markers were chemical, as you concluded?

    Why did they use the p24 antigen, though this antigen is not specific for “HIV” at all?

    Not sure whether this is cutting edge or mainstream business as usual …

    Jonathan:

    Though I also don’t understand Italian, I experienced that it is possible to get at least some pieces of the meaning of Dr. Franchi’s website. What’s more important is the huge number of visitors his site has attracted since November 2008. That’s really great. Looks like more and more people start to think for themselves, to take their own experiences seriously, to trust their own eyes.

    BTW, the Holy Orthodoxy is as active in Europe as they are in the U.S. No need to worry about us.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Sabine:
      By a happy coincidence, I just posted a piece about “HIV” “virions”. I also have a favorite quote about the variations in supposed “HIV” “Viral” “isolates”:
      “no two virus isolates are identical…. Within a single … host, HIV-1 population represents a complex mixture, or swarm, of mutant virus variants … [whose] prevalence … is changing … on almost a daily basis (intrahost evolution). Moreover, infected individuals within a human population harbor distinct viruses (interhost or populationwide heterogeneity). Finally, the global HIV-1 pandemic is composed of many local epidemics, which generally differ in … virus genotypes in circulation (global variation)” — Lukashov V. V., J. Goudsmit, and W. A. Paxton. 2002. The genetic diversity of HIV-¡ and its implications for vaccine development. In AIDS vaccine research, ed. Flossie Wong-Staal and Robert C. Gallo. Chapter 3, 93–¡20. New York: Marcel Dekker.

      As to reading Italian: Google has a “Translate” facility that can help

  4. Henry,

    “No two virus isolates are identical….”

    Oh yes, that’s true, because the “isolates” are not echt, they are fantasies.

    What would happen, if you wished to isolate the agents that are responsible for, let’s say, smallpox or measles? You would find them in the blood of each and every kid who is sick with those conditions. Without any exception. For the microbes that cause those conditions are echt. They do exist in reality. And they are the same, exactly the same, for every kid on earth who comes down with those illnesses.

    “HIV-1” to “HIV-x” do only exist as a fantasy of people who have regressed into the deepest state of trance mankind has ever experienced.

    To everybody who believes firmly in “HIV” as if it would really exist, I recommend reading the 25-year-old piece by Casper Schmidt on group fantasies. It is the most important article that has ever been written in the history of AIDS. But they should not read it only once, but once a day for 365 consecutive days. Perhaps that would wake them up.

    Re the Google translating machine: Some weeks ago an English website provided me with the German translation of a page, though I didn’t ask for it. The translation made me sick. I immediately switched to the English original and I don’t feel like trying it again.

    The Italian website of Dr. Franchi is not too big a problem for me, because I know English and I had Latin at school.

    But isn’t it funny? Many centuries ago the Romans finished the Greek empire, and now the American AIDS empire seems to get finished again by — the Romans.

  5. Cytotalker said

    If there exist so many numerous varieties of viral strains within a given host due to such chaotic, rapid, and numerous imperfections during countless instances of replication and transcription, how then is it possible for legal purposes to determine many years later that transmission did indeed occur from one individual to another? It would seem that the exponentially increasing number of strains would render such tracking impossible, especially for the purposes of determining if a person should be incarcerated for allegedly passing on the virus. They may have an explanation, but it does certainly seem that they want to have their cake and to eat it too. Chaotic variability seems convenient as an explanation for the failures in treatments and in the theory itself, but this same unprecedented chaotic variability does not seem to undermine the unquestioned claims made regarding the tracking of viral strains.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Cytotalker: “they want to have their cake and to eat it too”
      Of course.
      Tracking via DNA, RNA, whatever… doesn’t involve characterizing whole genomes. If you want to show similarity, you choose to look at “regions” that have been found to vary comparatively little, and if you want to explain the difficulty of getting vaccines or having antiretroviral drugs work, you choose to look at and emphasize the “regions” that are least likely to be similar in different “isolates”

      • onecleverkid said

        Just to clarify, the original phrase was the other way around: “Eat one’s cake and have it too”, which better describes their lack of logic.

        It reminds me of an e-mail I got from a certain PhD:

        ‘Although the promoters of “HIV=AIDS” are always saying the “HIV virus’s”
        reverse transcriptase sequence and other parts of its genome are mutating
        every time a patient dies while on “life saving” anti-retroviral drugs
        that supposedly target this and other “HIV-specific” gene sequence
        products, genomic analyses show that these retroid reverse transcriptase
        elements are among the most stable transcripts that make up these
        retroids. In other words, amongst gene sequence analysts, it is the
        sequence stability rather than the instability or mutability of the
        reverse transcriptase sequence itself that make these 120,000 retroelement
        sequences possible to classify as distinct sequences (15), while at the
        same time, the AIDS Establishment points to the mutability of these same
        sequences as the reason why they have failed to find a stable target in
        “the AIDS virus.”‘

    • SkepticThough said

      Further to the issue of this “Constantly Mutating” hobgoblin, it always amused me that such a simple organism such as HIV that consists (allegedly) of only 9 genes could possibly be mutating so often yet still remain viable. In the case of retroviruses, the source of the mutations are the inefficiency of reverse transcriptase, which makes many more errors than DNA polymerase. But these errors are random, and would not be limited to only the supposedly infinitely mutating genes that code for the shroud that coats the HIV core, allegedly making the virus perpetually “invisible” to the immune system. I guess this is one more chapter in the big book of HIV Lunacy.

      • Philip said

        Am reminded of something my wise old father said: Common sense is the biggest misnomer in the history of language.

      • Cytotalker said

        Another chapter of this lunacy has to do with the brouhaha caused by the occasional newly discovered strain, which immediately is unquestionably assumed to have the same immune-suppressiveness alleged for HIV-1, even if this new strain has been detected in only one or a few healthy (seemingly usually African) people and despite the fact that absolutely nothing is known about said strain. On such occasions, it is once again 1984, with the same jumps to conclusions and precipitous judgments, with the same lack of interest in scientifically verifying preconceptions, and with the same mass hysteria once again guiding policy. HIV is viewed by the public and exploited by professionals as that ticking time-bomb situation which allows all rules, standards, principles and conventions to be thrown out the window.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s