HIV/AIDS Skepticism

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

Human cancers (≥20% of them) are caused by viruses!

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2010/01/23

— at least so says Robert Gallo, co-non-discoverer of the non-AIDS-causing “HIV”.

In “HAART, heart disease, & lying with statistics” (2010/01/19)  I pointed out that Lo et al. (2010) claim statistical significance for an association between coronary disease and “HIV” without benefit of the proper control group, “HIV-positive” people who had never been fed antiretroviral drugs.

One of the earliest instances of the “bait and switch” tactic of ascribing to “HIV” what is actually caused by “treatment” against “HIV” was with lipodystrophy, which became prominent only upon introduction of protease inhibitors (PIs), a fact that doesn’t prevent mainstreamers from talking about “HIV-associated” lipodystrophy instead of PI-associated lipodystrophy. This attempted legerdemain of ascribing to “HIV” what is caused by antiretroviral drugs is widespread and will continue to be so, since an increasing proportion of “HIV-positive” people will suffer “treatment” as it is being extended to people with higher and higher CD4 counts, and is even proposed as prophylaxis in healthy, “HIV”-negative  people whose only “risk factor” is being an African woman. By the time every “HIV-positive” person is on antiretroviral drugs, every “side” effect of the drugs can be asserted to be “HIV-associated”.

Robert Gallo is engaged in an analogous attempted legerdemain by ascribing to viruses, without benefit of evidence, certain human cancers. According to Gallo, history teaches that the importance of infectious agents has been discounted for a century or so, despite periodic reminders: Spanish flu, polio, HIV: “ ‘I arrived in the National Cancer Institute in 1965 and there was a serious search for viruses involved in human cancer and a serious respect for infectious disease as potentially new epidemic disorders . . . . By 1975 the virus cancer programme had been killed and people had come to the conclusion that no virus was involved in human cancer and almost certainly would never be.’” Yet a few years later, those biases had been smashed. “Viruses are now known to be involved in about 20 per cent of all human cancers, maybe more, and we now have one of the great epidemics of all time in our face: HIV” (emphases added; “Keeping focused on eradicating a life-long and killer disease”).

Actually the virus-cancer program was not killed, it self-destructed because no human-cancer-causing viruses had been discovered, despite a mistaken claim by Gallo followed by his continuing insistence that HTLV is a retrovirus that causes leukemia — even as he writes that HTLV “tended to be transmitted within families and to stay within families for generations” (p. 114, Gallo 1991). To most people, even medical scientists and perhaps even virologists, something that stays within families for generations is a heritable genetic factor and not an infectious disease. But Gallo is quite ready to re-write medicine and science just as he feels entitled to re-write history: he ascribes medical advances from the beginning of the 20th century to “an increased understanding of and reliance upon the scientific method” (p. 2); and “over the last fifty years, I see few examples in which the scientific-medical establishment arrived at an important conclusion about a disease and was later shown to be wrong” (p. 297; maybe only “few”, but they’ve been fairly significant, like prions mistakenly thought to be lentiviruses, or bacterially caused ulcers ascribed to psychological stress, or shock treatments and lobotomies); and he describes interferon and cytokines as “non-chemical” (p. 301), as though Wöhler had not destroyed the basis for such distinctions in 1828.

Just a few weeks ago, before I had seen this latest Gallo emission, I’d commented that “ ‘HIV’ has infected virology with cancer-causing viruses” (2010/01/08)  in connection with XMRV, the allegedly “xenotropic” (species-jumping) mouse virus allegedly involved in prostate cancer because SOME prostate cancers can yield bits of “non-chemical” substances that might be interpretable as originating in a virus related to XMRV: HIV/AIDS has provided the precedent for regarding something as a cause just because bits of what might be from it can be found in some proportion of cases. Of course, if there’s a “statistically significant” correlation at the p<0.05 level, calculated by use of a ready-made statistics software package, that proves it scientifically, because in HIV-virology correlation proves causation. After all, the fact that a couple of strains of human papillomavirus (HPV) are correlated with genital warts is clear proof that HPV cause the cancers that are sometimes correlated with such warts.

Gallo is anything but shy, though his memory may be conveniently short. Twenty-five years ago he assured the Secretary for Health and Human Services that an anti-“HIV” vaccine would likely to be ready in a couple of years. Now, more than two decades of nothing but failed vaccine trials later, he interprets the latest failure of such a vaccine quite positively: “ ‘It worked, but all the positive data are in the first six months and after that there’s no protection. So whatever worked stopped working, and we have a good idea of what that might be . . . . I think it’s down to a special category of antibodies that were induced, and it fits with some ideas that we are working on.’ Gallo is understandably reserved about predicting the outcome of research in train, but he believes it could produce interesting results.”  He would obviously make a champion seller of Brooklyn Bridges, not to speak of snake oil; perhaps I should say, he has already shown himself to be such a champion.

The State of California has just added AZT to its list of recognized carcinogens. AZT was administered for more than two decades to “HIV-positive” individuals, and during this time an association was noticed between certain cancers — for example, cervical cancer — and “HIV-positive”. Should not Gallo point out to Governor Schwarzenegger that it isn’t the AZT that causes cancer, it’s the HIV against which the AZT is administered?

But Gallo’s (unsupported and unsupportable) claim that ≥20% of human cancers are virus-caused is far too modest. He unaccountably failed to realize that “HIV” can be indicted for an even more widespread condition that negatively affects human beings, namely, aging. The logic is simply the increasingly common syllogism by which HAART-associated equals “HIV”-associated:

Aging is caused in some part, perhaps very large part, by accumulation of mitochondrial mutations and increasingly poor mitochondrial function (Linnane et al. 1989).
Antiretroviral drugs cause mitochondrial damage.
“HIV-positive” people consume antiretroviral drugs.
QED: “HIV-positive” is associated with mitochondrial damage which leads to aging.

This is not a purely theoretical deduction, moreover: it has been noticed that “HIV-positive” individuals often seem to age very prematurely: “A striking number of HIV patients are living longer but getting older faster — showing early signs of dementia and bone weakness usually seen in the elderly” (David France, “Another kind of AIDS crisis”, New York Magazine, 1 November 2009):
“patients who contracted the virus just a few years back are showing signs of what’s being called premature or accelerated aging. Early senility turns out to be an increasingly common problem . . . . One large-scale multi-city study released its latest findings this summer that over half of the HIV-positive population is suffering some form of cognitive impairment. Doctors are also reporting a constellation of ailments in middle-aged patients that are more typically seen at geriatric practices, in patients 80 and older. They range from bone loss to organ failure to arthritis. Making matters worse, HIV patients are registering higher rates of insulin resistance and cholesterol imbalances, and they suffer elevated rates of melanoma and kidney cancers and seven times the rate of other non-HIV-related cancers. Whether this is a result of the drugs or the disease itself, or some combination, is still an open question . . . .”

It’s an open question only for people who don’t remember the past. Whether “non-HIV-related cancers” are a result of “HIV” is not an open question, it’s an attempt to obfuscate. Under HIV/AIDS theory, the average time from “HIV-positive” to any symptoms of illness is 10 years. Now, “patients who contracted the virus just a few years back are showing signs of what’s being called premature or accelerated aging” [emphasis added].

The determined defenders of the orthodox faith speak in hand-waving fashion which ignores that chronology (among other things). The official line is that the life-saving drugs are enabling HIV/AIDS patients to live longer than ever before, and so to become prone to ailments of old age. What that attempted explaining-away does not explain is that the ailments “of old age” are affecting people in middle age; HAART-treated individuals are not living into old age and getting those ailments. Moreover, in the past, in the early days of actual AIDS, people died from opportunistic infections, not from cancers or other typically old-age conditions.

——————————————–
SOURCES:
Gallo 1991: “Virus Hunting: AIDS, Cancer, and the Human Retrovirus: A Story of Scientific Discovery”, BasicBooks

Linnane 1989: Linnane AW, Marzuki S, Ozawa T, Tanaka M. “Mitochondrial DNA mutations as an important contributor to ageing and degenerative diseases”, Lancet 25 (8639) 642-5

Lo et al.: Janet Lo, Suhny Abbara, Leon Shturman, Anand Soni, Jeffrey Wei, Jose A. Rocha-Filho, Khurram Nasir, and Steven K. Grinspoon, “Increased prevalence of subclinical coronary atherosclerosis detected by coronary computed tomography angiography in HIV-infected men” AIDS 24 [2010] 243-53

About these ads

35 Responses to “Human cancers (≥20% of them) are caused by viruses!”

  1. Philip said

    One of my good friends from medical school went to the United States after graduation for further training. He completed his residency in Internal Medicine and chose to become an Infectious Disease specialist. When he came back, we met up and had a nice conversation. Unfortunately he let slip an opinion of his (no doubt fostered on him by his mentors) that in his mind, practically EVERY disease will be found to have an infectious cause.

    We see the product of this thinking in the wild search for a Chronic Fatigue Syndrome virus and/or mycoplasma. He even believes that atherosclerosis, and even arthritis may be found to have an infectious cause. (!!!)

    At one time I might have agreed that such a concept. Not anymore.

    People always want to blame someone else. It’s human nature. Passing the buck, washing hands off your own healthcare… it’s more and more common.

    For big pharma, more blame on bugs means more money spent on meds. No one wants to accept that things they do to themselves: smoking, poor diet, poor habits, not getting quality rest, etc… is whats making you sick.

    The more I read about Gallo’s statements and compare them to Duesberg’s the more I am inclined to put my faith in Duesberg. Duesberg is more than willing to ADMIT his mistakes re: oncogene hypothesis or retroviral cause of cancer. Heck, he mapped out retroviral DNA. He helped developed oncogene theory. Yet now he’s saying he himself was wrong when he saw more evidence for the aneuploidal theory of cancer. And yet the media is bashing HIM for being unwilling to face evidence? I cannot accept that.

    Gallo’s sister died of leukemia when he was young. Since then he was obsessed with finding a reason for his personal emotional loss. It would have shattered his psyche to think that, indirectly, we as a people killed his sister because of toxic waste or radiation. No, it had to be something not related to humanity, something evil, sinister… a VIRUS! So desperate he was to find this evil culprit that he’d blame HTLV I and HTLV II on cancers despite questionable epidemiology.

  2. Francis said

    I feel fairly confident with the current state of play that it wont be long before a research lab using PCR for gene sequencing, manages to find a common piece of RNA in geriatric humans. This will likely be linked to a retroviral particle and hence death through old age will become a sexually transmitted disease.

    It seems to me that science is attempting to unlock the secrets of the universe by narrowing down to ever decreasing particle sizes. As if by visualising an atom, theoretical parts of atoms or snippets of DNA, the biggest questions of mankind can be answered.

    To my tiny intellect, I would have thought that taking a holistic approach to the complexities of a living organism like an animal or the vastness of the cosmos would make more sense in the search for disease causation or the meaning of everything.

    The major improvements in human health have come through very basic reforms such as sanitation and nutrition, not expensive magic pills. Disease ALWAYS follows a breakdown in those two necessities. Disease does not cause bad water, air or food.

    Simply, they have confused cause and effect. There is ample evidence that virus-like particles emanate from cells that are stressed for a variety of reasons. Remove the stressors and health returns if the point of no return has not been reached. Good health is the natural state of all organisms. How possibly can filling someone with toxic chemicals induce or restore good health?

    Humans also have a propensity for blaming someone or something else for their problems. Lifestyle can be deadly. I myself smoke tobacco, it will probably kill me. That is my decision and my fault. I certainly won’t blame a virus or tobacco company for it. Similarly AIDS is induced not caught. The gay fastlane lifestyle is hardly healthy and taking various drugs is downright bad, but they won’t take responsibility for the outcomes. The only innocents are those such as in Africa who are born into squalor and have no choice and the newborns who pay for their parents’ lifestyle mistakes.

    The reality is that death is inevitable. The money squandered on these fruitless quests would be better spent on improving the lot of mankind as a whole.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Francis: Perhaps you missed my quote from Claus Koehnlein’s talk in Oakland: “Life is a sexually transmitted disease which ends in death after an incubation period of 77 years”.

    • Philip said

      “The major improvements in human health have come through very basic reforms such as sanitation and nutrition, not expensive magic pills. Disease ALWAYS follows a breakdown in those two necessities. Disease does not cause bad water, air or food.”

      Quoth Luc Montagier, “Water is key.”

    • Philip said

      I forgot to add: AZT cures aging! By killing you young!

  3. MacDonald said

    Tentative new discovery: Diet might be more important than obesity genes:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090911072840.htm

    Unless of course you happen to be infected with Ad-36, the dreaded obesity virus:

    http://www.obesityvirus.com/page.aspx?page=testforobesityvirus

    It’s interesting that Gallo should think the vaccine success is down to a special type of antibodies since recent consensus has been that it’s the cellular immune defences that are the key to combating HIV. A wild guess: the type of antibodies Gallo is referring to is related to one of his own projects and/or pet ideas?

    Nothing is more revealing of Gallo’s religious awe of viruses (or at least his papal mission to instill such awe in the rest of us) than his ideas of divine retribution every time we forget to pay homage to them before every meal and at bedtime:

    “If you read the history, just before the so-called Spanish flu killed so many people in 1918-1919, people were thinking that epidemics of fatal infectious diseases were something of a previous century,” he explains.

    Likewise, just before polio hit the US in the middle of the 20th century, funding into infectious disease was losing traction. “The sudden, viral horrifying global epidemics were passé and people said money should be turned over to study degenerative diseases: cancer, brain diseases, arthritis and so on.”

    There was a similar lull in infectious disease research before HIV struck in the early 1980s, [Gallo] notes.”

    According to Gallo, merely thinking about diverting funding from the study of viruses is a sure way to cause the onset of a worldwide plague.

    It is Old Testament-style sermons like this that makes it very hard to believe these people are acting in good faith (pun intended).

    • Henry Bauer said

      MacDonald: Nowadays, in the HIV-AIDS-virus era, I seem to live in a state of perpetual astonishment. Reading your link to the test for obesity virus made me infer that it was a satirical hoax, until I Googled “obesity virus” and was astonished to find it’s a serious assertion. And the obesity virus fully satisfies the HIV criterion that a tentative or weak association is proof of causation: “a third of obese people had the rare and highly contagious virus compared to just 11 percent of thinner people”. I wish I had known this when I was still teaching. One third of my students who failed freshman chemistry used to miss class frequently, but only 11% of those who got a (barely) passing “C” or “D” grade did so. Evidently, there’s a virus that causes students to miss classes. And I could have gone into business selling kits to test for the virus.

      • Philip said

        Ah but Henry, you forget that according to HIV-AIDS theory, finding the “virus” in 33% of obese people is enough to prove causation! However, according to Montangier’s earlier experiments, we have to find the virus in 33% of obese people and 70% of pre-obese people to further cement causation!

  4. Francis said

    I am slightly curious as to if the obesity virus crossed the species barrier in the 70′s too as this is a fairly recent phenomenom. Perhaps they will find the elusive HOV (hippopotamos obesity virus). One thing is for sure it hasn’t infected Africa yet. People infected with HOV are usually co-infected with the Type II diabetes virus , which accelerates progression to death. One promising ARV has found to be effective though, AZT, as drastic weight loss has been found during therapy. And yes, no doubt it is transmitted sexually.

    I saw on TV yesterday that HPV the non-virus that doesn’t cause cervical cancer, has been linked to certain skin cancers and also mouth/throat cancer. This one is shaping up as a block buster virus for the pharma’s. And yes it’s sexually transmitted by oral sex, which hither to had been a low risk HIV activity.

    I’m now more interested in how many of the Fauci’s, Gallo’s et al are Catholics? They certainly seem to have a something against sex.

    Stop it or you’ll go blind.

    • Philip said

      uh… I’m a catholic. practicing. almost became a priest once…

      I don’t think they’re intentionally targetting sex, but from a “scare tactic” point of view sex is certainly an activity you can use to scare people with…

  5. mo79uk said

    Shorter telomeres — associated with accelerated age and death — are found in those who test HIV+; of course it’s not said that shorter telomeres lead to being HIV+.

    If all or most cancers were viruses and infectious there should of course be cancer outbreaks. But that hasn’t happened. So we can say without much thought that a hindered immune system just allows cells to live that should die.

    • Henry Bauer said

      mo79uk: You haven’t quite grasped Gallo-virus theory. Perhaps the obesity virus, like HTLV, is transmitted primarily within families, for generations; and like HIV is transmitted by other means only with great difficulty and infrequently, between 1 in 1000 and 1 in 10,000 contacts

  6. ale said

    breaking news. CDCs says that the burgers must be eaten wrapped in plastic to prevent obesity virus :)

  7. Martin said

    Hi Dr. Bauer, The emergence of an obesity “epidemic” is more than likely not due to either a contagious virus (which I’m sure the virus hunters would salivate at exploiting) or an obesity gene, but due primarily to psychiatric mood-altering drugs: both SSRIs which are antidepressants and neuroleptics which are the so-called antipsychotics. The former more than the latter. A good friend of mine who died about a year ago switched (about 15 years ago) from alcohol use to antidepressants and presto chango, rapid weight increase.

    • Philip said

      Not just mood altering drugs, but this whole obsession with refined foods. Also, in Chinese medicine foods that are frozen and reheated are a no-no. Lastly, in Chinese medicine, a quick way to wreck a kid’s digestive system is to pretend they’re not kids and feed them the same foods as adults. My explanation is this: do we give a baby a motorcycle or start them on training wheels? Do we expect a child who has just begun to talk to immediately able to give speeches on stage? Of course not! They need to master those skills. Likewise for digestion.

      *remembers seeing one year olds being fed ice cream during a birthday party.. grrr*

  8. Francis said

    mo79uk, Shorter Telomeres would be expected on a diet of DNA chain terminators. Was that research conducted on un-medicated HIV+’s? I’ll bet my left one it wasn’t.

    It is absolute fallacy attempting to blame obesity on viral causes. With the rare exceptions of glandular abnormalities the calculation is simple and proven.

    Calorie Intake Vs Calorie Expenditure = Body Mass Index.

    There’s no secret to why obesity is on the rise, people eat more, eat crap and do very little in comparison with our ancestors. There’s no secret as to why diabetes is on the rise, we’re filling up on simple sugars and overloading the ability of insulin to regulate the system.

    The way this is going, virologists will win over nutritionists just as they did over toxicologists. As Montagnier said on HIV and it relates to many other maladies, “There’s no profit in nutrition.”

    I found the source of the infection for obesity, it’s in my refrigerator, and wearing condoms to McDonalds won’t do you any good at all. Eat good whole foods, including God forbid some meat, get off your arse and move, remove stressors and rest up well. Then with a little luck, you won’t need to go to the doctors and get a hokey test for whatever. Grandma had it right, “Everything in moderation”, especially medicine it seems.

    Doctors have become vending machines for pills, Lord knows how we evolved and survived without them. They have no interest in your health, how can they with an average 6-minute consultation. They rely on tests developed with pharmaceutical money to peddle pharmaceutical drugs and follow the doctrine of the MERCK manual, a pharmaceutical publication. FOLLOW THE MONEY.

    The more medicine we are exposed to, the unhealthier we become, which is self-evident in the richer societies that, bona fide disease aside, are the unhealthiest of them all.

    Sorry Henry, but this does get me angry so I’m going to eat an apple, take a walk, and breathe deeply.

    HIV, XMRV, HPV 1 – 100 and now Ad-36 AAArrrgh.

    • mo79uk said

      The few studies I’ve seen haven’t indicated whether the infected were on medication. Some have looked at the late stage HIV+ who will almost certainly be on ARVs — so yes, it’s not useful stuff.

      As well as lack of activity, people who stay indoors a lot are less likely to produce adequate vitamin D from sunlight. Vitamin D deficiency has been linked to obesity, on top of poor diets.

    • Philip said

      Francis, being an MD myself (yet one who has embraced Chinese medicine), I feel obligated to comment on your… comment. MDs definitely have an interest in patients’ health, it’s just that what we are taught in med school is always based on “research” funded by big pharma. Hence, it’s not that they don’t want us to get healthy through natural methods – we’re taught like drones that it doesn’t work and that only the pills work. I don’t blame MDs for looking down on natural medicine – that’s big pharma’s fault. However, I point an accusing finger not at MDs in general but only those who willingly ignore the evidence supporting natural medicine for whatever reason. If an MD really cares about health (and believe me there are a lot) then we would try to look for whatever means to help our patients.

      Unfortunately there are those who, either being too stuck with the old paradigm, or having too much blind faith in the powers-that-be, or just being too lazy to think (or lastly, making too much money off the old paradigm) that they attack natural medicine despite the good it does for BOTH patient and MD!. (case in point, rehab doctors love acupuncturists because acupuncture helps relax spastic muscles in stroke patients, thus the aforementioned patients become more compliant with their rehab and don’t give up due to difficulty or pain)

  9. MacDonald said

    O ye of little faith, I bet next you’re going to tell me that schizophrenia can’t be cured with anti-virals:

    http://www.nrc.nl/international/article2451917.ece/Herpes_virus_linked_to_schizophrenia

    Note, the explanatory model is the same nearly every time: genetics in conjunction with viral infection. That’s why some of the most exciting viral diseases tend to run in the family (-:

  10. Francis said

    mo79uk, Just a quick thought on vitamin D as it’s Australia Day. We produce Vitamin D from exposure to sunlight, we are unable to synthesise it. A deficiency would indicate not getting outside and by proxy a more couch-like existence. Not scientific I know but just a point to display that Correlation does not prove Causation.

    I’m off to a barbeque now to stand in the sun, sink a few beers, have a snack and talk shit.

    Have a good one.

    • mo79uk said

      Hi Francis,

      That’s true, although even lounging in the sun can create vitamin D. :)

      One other thing to note is that the popular form of vitamin D supplement (vitamin D2) is not actually vitamin D at all. Vitamin D3 (sourced from sheep lanolin and identical to what humans produce) is, and is also cheaper.

      There’s a lot of functions for vitamin D, not least that it’s a natural immunomodulator.

  11. dog said

    I call your attention to a discussion by the Perth Group on the HIV genome at the url

    http://www.theperthgroup.com/Nobel/MontagnierGenome.pdf

    that describes the work of one Dr. Eva Rakowicz-Szulczynska (see page 7 of this document). Quoting directly from the Perth Group “Dr. Eva Rakowicz-Szulczynska published evidence showing that nucleic acid sequences similar to the “HIV” env and gag genes were found in 95% of breast and gynaecological cancer in women and prostate cancer in men. “The DNA fragments amplified in seven blindly selected breast cancer samples were sequenced. The breast cancer DNA sequences showed at least 90% homology to the HIV-1 gene for p41”. In 1999 they reported “DNA sequences with 90 to 96% homology to HIV-1 Env were recently detected by PCR in breast cancer and in prostate cancer cells…The results obtained strongly suggest that the long-postulated breast cancer virus may, in fact, be related to HIV-1”.” End Quote.

    The publications on HIV-like cancer antigens stopped in 2000. However I have found a relatively recent press release (Dated Feb 7 2008) from a company called ViroTech with which Dr. Eva Rakowicz-Szulczynska is associated.

    URL http://www.virotech.us/page/page/5390470.htm.

    Yes they (she) claims it is an HIV-like cancer virus.

    • Henry Bauer said

      dog: This is just more of the same: tentative associations, “homologies” . . . . Humans and chimps are 99% “homologous” in DNA.
      “This novel virus is exogenous, and probably has derived from the same ancestor as HIV. ViroTech LLC has proved that the HIV-like human cancer virus stays invisible in the DNA of blood lymphocytes of many currently healthy people. When the new virus becomes active” —
      An EXOGENOUS (i.e. authentic) virus doesn’t stay invisible inside DNA somewhere, it exists as virions. ViroTech is describing the DNA analogue of a postulated retroviral sequence that can be expressed in some manner under some circumstance or other. That’s reminiscent of the increasingly popular hypothesis that “HIV” is a mistaken inference drawn from the occasional expression or part-expression of HERVs, which are thought to make up about 8% of the human genome.

      • MacDonald said

        Ah, but Prof. Duesberg, and his friends at the Sanger Instute aren’t able to find any HIV-like sequences anywhere in the human genome, so there MUST have been a plethora of “authentic” HIVs and HIV-like viruses jumping various species barriers within the last century.

      • Philip said

        MacDonald: have you heard about Cantrell’s hypothesis that “hiv” may related to mycobacteria? I am leaning towards this a bit more than the endogenous retrovirus hypothesis.

        a) Myron Essex himself had a study showing that in Africa, 70% of people exposed to mycobacteria tuberculosis or mycobacteria leprae would test positive in an HIV test.

        b) It would explain why whatever it is HIV tests detect can seem to be transmissible in some cases, but not necessarily sexually – it would make sense that people living together for a long time could infect each other with strains of TB that cross react with “HIV” proteins.

        c) It would also explain why most AIDS cases in third world countries are associated with TB – could it be that the TB itself is triggering cross reactions with HIV tests?

        d) Luc Montagier found that T-Cells infected with “HIV” survive when given certain antibiotics – doesn’t make sense at first since antibiotics don’t kill viruses – but does make sense if said antibiotics have action against TB. (memory fails me as to what antibiotics are mentioned… but it is in Dr. Bauer’s book)

    • Philip said

      Here’s what bugs me (and a whole lot of others)…

      Claim: HIV mutates at an unprecedented rate, supposedly. This is why it’s impossible to make a vaccine (or, maybe, it’s impossible to make a vaccine for something that doesn’t exist…)

      Claim: Assuming HIV does exist and does mutate to the point that vaccines don’t work (which means that a whole lot of surface proteins change), yet it maintains the same predilection for the same receptors in CD 4 cells, among others. This assumption must be made in order to maintain HIV-AIDS hypothesis.

      Logic dictates that HIV must then have a gazillion different strains, each with virtually the SAME pathogenic effects.

      And YET here we see that a “virus” with “90% homology” to HIV p41 another one with “90-96% homology” to HIV-1 env proteins (envelope! meaning surface coating!) has a TOTALLY DIFFERENT EFFECT? This apparent virus targets different cells (breast and prostate) and does the opposite of what HIV supposedly does (instead of killing them off, it lets them replicate even more!)

      I mean it is true that species that seemingly are on opposite ends of the evolutionary pole have a lot of common genes, but I mean come on, when you get chimps and humans you at least have something SIMILAR – mammalian characteristics, opposable thumbs, etc. In this case we’re expected to believe that a giant humpback whale and the fungus growing under my shoe soles are 90% homologous… yet two different breeds of dog are so different genetically that our immune system’s can’t tell one from the other… (remember that vaccination works by priming our immune systems to recognize bad guys before they actually come in)

    • Adriana Szulczynska said

      Yes, indeed, I have witnessed the discovery of Rakowicz-Szulczynska’s exogenous “human-female cancer virus” because I am her daughter and co-author of one of her articles about the virus. My mother passed away in 2008 and because of that, Virotech is very inactive lately.

      It is amazing how people are always reluctant to accept the existence of viruses… Peyton Raus, the discoverer of Raus Sarcoma virus did not receive his Nobel Prize until 60 years elapsed from his discovery. Although it’s been proven that the Mouse Mammary cancer is caused by a virus, which is transmitted through breast milk, very few people are willing to accept the fact that human breast cancer might be caused by a virus and that this virus may be spread by breast milk from mother to infant, just like HIV and the mouse mammary virus.

      I am certain that future scientists will prove the existence of HIV and many other exogenous and endogenous viruses. Afterall,when Dr. Felix d’Herelle first discovered bacteriophages in the 1910′s, leading scientists of the day including the Nobel Prize laureate Bordet, claimed that “d’Herelle’s viruses” did not exist and that they were merely bacterial enzymes. And yet today, more than 50 years after D’Herelle’s death, we see magnificent electron microscope photos of bacterial viruses and Western scientists are just starting to reexplore phage therapy, which D’Herelle had mastered at the beginning of this century.

  12. Francis said

    Just wanted to throw one out there from left field as it popped into my head while looking for something else. Forgive me the use of Wikipedia I’m feeling lazy.

    The Perth Group maintain an oxidative stress theory for HIV/AIDS.

    One of the best predictors of testing HIV positive and progression to AIDS, according to Valendar Turner, is the frequency of receptive anal sex, in males and females.

    Most personal lubricants are based on Glycerol (Glycerine) and are used liberally for the practice of anal sex. The rectum is a rich vascular region and many medications are given in suppository form due to the rapid uptake direct to the blood stream.

    From Wiki (sorry); http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycerol

    “Topical pure or nearly pure glycerol is an effective treatment for psoriasis, burns, bites, cuts, rashes, bedsores, and calluses.[Needs footnote.] It can be used orally to eliminate halitosis, as it is a contact bacterial desiccant.[Needs footnote.] The same property makes it very helpful with periodontal disease; it penetrates biofilm quickly and eliminates bacterial colonies.”

    “Used as a laxative when introduced into the rectum in suppository or small-volume (2to10ml)(enema) form; irritates the anal mucosa and induces a hyperosmotic effect.”

    “Glycerol can also be used as a bodybuilding supplement to increase nitric oxide (NO) uptake in the muscles and act in a similar way to the amino acid arginine to create swelling in the working muscle for the individual.”

    From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18341206

    Nitric oxide (NO), initially described as a physiological mediator of endothelial cell relaxation plays an important role in hypotension. It is an intercellular messenger and has been recognized as one of the most versatile players in the immune system. Cells of the innate immune system–macrophages, neutrophils and natural killer (NK) cells use pattern recognition receptors to recognize molecular patterns associated with pathogens. Activated macrophages then inhibit pathogen replication by releasing a variety of effector molecules, including NO. In addition to macrophages, a large number of other immune system cells produce and respond to NO. Thus, NO is important as a toxic defense molecule against infectious organisms. It also regulates the functional activity, growth and death of many immune and inflammatory cell types including macrophages, T lymphocytes, antigen-presenting cells, mast cells, neutrophils and NK cells. However, the role of NO in non-specific and specific immunity in vivo and in immunologically mediated diseases and inflammation is poorly understood. This review discusses the role of NO in immune response and inflammation and its mechanisms of action in these processes.

    From me;

    So Glycerol is capable of killing off the intestinal flora, irritating the anal mucosa and increases the uptake of nitric oxide. Nitric Oxide has a large array of effects on the immune function in mammals.

    In combination with nitrite inhalants or other drugs with a strong nitrogen profile eg amphetamines and cocaine, it seems logical to me that Glycerol multiplies the effects of these drugs and in itself increases Nitric Oxide production intracellularly which has a direct effect on the immune function and as mentioned…T-Cells.

    Any thoughts?

  13. Francis said

    Post Script to my last post.

    Perhaps an explanation why women are less prone to AIDS than males.

    from; http://www.rndsystems.com/cb_detail_objectname_SU06_estrogen.aspx

    Estrogen & the Immune System: Of mice and women (and nitric oxide)
    Date 9/8/2006

    “Being female can be both an advantage and a disadvantage, immunologically speaking. It has long been known that both innate and adaptive immune responses of females are somewhat more robust than males. On the other hand, females are more susceptible to autoimmune disorders such as lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and multiple sclerosis. These gender differences are largely attributed to estrogen levels.1,2 Estrogen-related regulation of nitric oxide (NO), and the enzymes that produce it, increasingly appear to play a key role.”

    Now I’m off to bed.

  14. Aut Aut said

    As far as the hiv-related cancers are concerned – according to the ortodox view – what “mechanism” has been shown – or i’d better say – is thought to induce them? Is hiv supposed to cause them directly or indirectly as a result of a weakened immune system? BTW, what became of the Immuno Surveillance Theory?

    • Henry Bauer said

      Aut Aut:
      Good question!
      What is the evidence that 20% of human cancers are caused by viruses?
      Has everyone forgotten that virologists looked unsuccessfully for human-cancer-causing viruses in the initial decades of the “war on cancer”? — see the pertinent chapters in Duesberg’s “Inventing the AIDS Virus”

      I don’t know what Immuno Surveillance Theory is.

      • Aut Aut said

        yes, right.. I’ll be reading the Duesberg’s book very soon (right after I’ll be finished with reading yours.. )

        BTW, the Immuno Surveillance Theory is an old theory -older than the hiv theory, as far as I can recall,- according to which the immune system has the ability to recognize and destroy/counteract some tumor cells – actually, only those whose cells can show “original” proteins on their surface that are recognised as being “non-self”.
        Obviously this theory fails to explain why pratically all cancers occour in immunocompetent people.. nontheless I know it is somehow still investigated.. (in a recent article I’ve read, cancer-reserchers were studying a vaccine in order to teach the immune system how to recognize some tumors..the idea is to destroy them or, at least, keep them at bay, making cancer another “manageable disease”…

        Anyway, since I knew no direct hiv mechanism has ever been show, then I thought this theory was the underlying idea behind the hiv related cancers: weakened immune system ergo no protection against those cancers..

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

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 109 other followers