HIV/AIDS Skepticism

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

TB and “HIV”

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2010/03/26

HIV/AIDS dogmatists attribute to “HIV” any unwelcome condition in which a significant proportion of patients test “HIV-positive” — even when that condition is clearly owing to antiretroviral drugs, as with “HIV-associated lipodystrophy”  (Misleading is worse than lying — The case of “HIV-associated” lipodystrophy, 2008/11/10). Thus the tendency of people with bacterial pneumonia to test “HIV-positive” was attributed to “HIV-associated immunedeficiency” predisposing people to infection by pneumonia bacteria.
In “One fact, two interpretations”, 2009/04/26, I pointed out that such associations can equally be explained by noting that people who are ill from virtually any ailment tend to test “HIV-positive” more often than others. That is notably the case with tuberculosis. Results of “HIV” tests in the United States show members of 3 groups testing “HIV-positive” as frequently as 50% or more (Table 23 in The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory): gay men, drug abusers, and TB patients. That led me to ask rhetorically: Is tuberculosis an aphrodisiac? [2008/01/04].

Tony Lance alerted me to an article [Khopotso Bodibe, “Explaining TB-HIV integration”, 24.03.2010 ]  that illustrates how HIV/AIDS theorists misinterpret the tendency for TB patients to test “HIV-positive”. Here is an annotation of the relevant portions of that article:

“Tuberculosis and HIV are two separate infections. One is a bacterial organism that has been around for many, many years and the other is a virus that was discovered less than 30 years ago. If untreated, both can induce untold suffering and death. Now what’s worse is that over the last decade or so, HIV clinicians have observed that many of their patients develop TB over time.”
NO: people who have contracted TB are likely to test “HIV-positive” before the TB becomes overtly debilitating.
“[A]bout 80% of South Africans living with HIV will develop TB. An HIV-positive person is 50 times more likely to develop active TB than an HIV-negative individual. In most cases, TB is also the first disease that a person with HIV gets before they even know their HIV status”.
Exactly. There is no evidence that the “HIV-positive” status preceded the development of active TB. Recall, please, that when AIDS was first recognized, the characteristic diseases were Kaposi’s sarcoma, Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, and candidiasis; those, not TB, ought to be “the first disease(s) that ‘HIV-positive’ people get” .
“In Mpumalanga the TB burden is already high. About 612 people out of every 100 000 have Tuberculosis. TB is also known as the number one killer in the province. The epidemic has had a knock-on effect on the HIV prevalence” [emphasis added]
Again, exactly: “HIV-positive” Africans are not dying of the characteristic AIDS diseases, they are dying now — just like before the “AIDS” era — of tuberculosis.
Of course the incidence of TB has a “knock-on” (in American, “domino”) effect on “HIV” prevalence: TB infection is a prime cause of cross-reactions with “HIV” tests, something obvious from US statistics almost from the beginning of “HIV” testing.
“a third of the world’s population or two billion people globally, is estimated to have latent TB”
In other words, 50 times as many as the most inflated estimates for “HIV”. So which is more likely? “HIV” predisposes to TB, or TB predisposes to “HIV”? After all, 98% of TB carriers acquired it without benefit of “HIV”.
“[P]atients that are HIV-infected have a very high risk of developing Tuberculosis if they are carrying TB around in a latent form”
People with active TB are more likely to test “HIV-positive” than non-symptomatic TB carriers are.
“it’s important to remember that there is a lot of TB in the environment since we have a rampant epidemic in the country”
Yes, exactly. 50 times as many TB carriers as “HIV” carriers.
“[I]f untreated, TB can kill a person with HIV/AIDS in a matter of weeks.”
By the time a TB patient tests “HIV-positive”, the prognosis is poor: the more ill a person is, the more likely to test “HIV-positive”. Attributing the deaths to “HIV” inverts cause and effect. The mainstream has done this ever since Dondero and Curran of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention thought that the correlation between mortality and “HIV-positive” status showed that “HIV” causes death, forgetting that correlations never prove causation [Dondero & Curran, “Excess deaths in Africa from HIV: confirmed and quantified”, Lancet 343 (1994) 989-90].

21 Responses to “TB and “HIV””

  1. mo79uk said

    Just want to ask, could a person with end-stage cancer also test HIV+? I assume this has never been done because it appears insensitive. Also, is a postmortem blood test more likely to test positive too?

    • Henry Bauer said

      mo79uk:
      “HIV-positive” is high in autopsies of non-AIDS cases (sources on p. 85 of my book); critically ill hospital patients tested higher than less ill patients; emergency-room patients test high. But I have no data on cancer patients specifically. I suspect that it would be difficult to get meaningful data because such a high proportion of “HIV+” people are on antiretrovirals, at least some of which are carcinogens.

  2. Tim Hunt said

    Interesting.

    I read this from: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100308095828.htm which basically states that IL-10 has been found to actually shut down CD4 T-cells in HIV positive patients.

    Quote: “Our findings show that the membrane protein PD-1 is up-regulated during HIV infection by the release of bacterial products from the gut and this subsequently increases the production of a cell derived factor, IL-10 that paralyses the immune system ,” says senior author Dr. Rafick-Pierre Sékaly, a professor at the Université de Montréal, researcher at the Centre de Recherche du CHUM and scientific director of the Vaccine and Gene Therapy Institute of Florida. “We are the first to show that these two molecules work together to shut down the function of CD4 T-cells in HIV patients. This in turn, may lead to paralysis of the immune system and an accelerated disease progression .”

    Please note the article did not say that they have found HIV shutting down CD4 T-cells just that they’ve found IL-10 shutting down CD4 T-cells in the people that test positive.

    Now it is noteworthy that C. Albicans and Mycobacterium avium complex bacterium are exceptionally strong inducers of IL-10.

    With the IL-10 connection do we have the workings of an immune dysfunction and destruction formula leading to AIDS???

    Maybe Lawrence Broxmeyer and Alan Cantwell were on the money when they wrote AIDS ‘‘It’s the bacteria, stupid!’’
    in Medical Hypothesises.

    What do you guys think?

  3. Tim Hunt said

    And it is also interesting that HAART has anti fungal effects on C. Albicans thereby stopping some IL-10 induction which should logically lead to an improved CD4 count from this single effect.

    From: Anti-fungal therapy at the HAART of viral therapy(Munro, Hube)

    “It would appear that HIV proteinase inhibitors also have a direct effect on one of the key virulence factors of C. albicans, the secreted aspartic proteinases (Saps).”

    Does this explain a possible short term improvement of HIV positives starting meds?

    • Manuel Fernandes said

      And why not giving anti-fungal meds without the toxic properties of HAART to see if they can acheive the same results?

      • Henry Bauer said

        Manuel Fernandes:
        Good idea. I suspect that some of the doctors who treat “AIDS” patients by non-conventional, alternative, or complementary methods may do this. Certainly some have recommended and practiced treating the manifest actual illnesses directly, rather than indirectly by trying to kill off “HIV”.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Tim Hunt:
      Yes, I think anti-fungal (and more generally antibiotic) action of antiretrovirals is a very plausible explanation for short-term improvement of “people with AIDS”. In fact, short-term improvement can hardly be attributed to antiretroviral action, because supposed detruction or inhibition of the supposed virus is only said to allow slow recuperation of the immune system.

      • mo79uk said

        On BBC News today: HIV patients ‘need drug lifeline’

        “…the addition of co-trimoxazole, an inexpensive antibiotic, to the long-term treatment plan of those with the worst affected immune systems appears to prevent many of these deaths.”

      • Henry Bauer said

        mo79uk:
        The next major advance will be the discovery that treating manifest illnesses without antiretrovirals works even better than treating them in conjunction with antiretrovirals — works better only in the sense of the person regaining health, of course; leaves that nasty “HIV” untouched. Back, in other words, to how Sonnabend treated early AIDS patients, so effectively that Michael Callen lived for thirteen active years even after having been close to death’s door with “full-blown AIDS”.

      • Manuel Fernandes said

        Before the “discovery” of the so called “HIV” they were doing that — treating manifest illnesses without antiretrovirals — and people continued to die. Any comments on this Dr. Bauer?

      • Henry Bauer said

        Manuel Fernandes:
        My best guess is that there was immunedeficiency, specifically or most particularly failure to guard against fungal infections, see Tony Lance’s intestinal dysbiosis hypothesis [What really caused AIDS: Slicing through the Gordian Knot, 20 February 2008]. So even as the diseases were treated, they kept recurring; or, with PCP, it was thought to be a parasite or bacterial pneumonia, so wrong treatment was used; and with Kaposi’s sarcoma, it wasn’t realized that poppers were the cause and that they needed to be stopped — and perhaps so much harm had already been done that recuperation wasn’t feasible, and anyway I’m not sure that there is a treatment for popper-caused KS. Starting treatment too late might also have been a reason for death with other ailments than KS.
        Michael Callen changed his lifestyle completely, stopped all “recreational” drugs, tried to eat healthily and generally listen to his body’s needs.

  4. Manuel Fernandes said

    The main question here is: Why don’t we (HIV-Rethinkers, Skeptics, Denialists) gather money and specialists to perform isolation experiments to prove whether or not a retrovirus “HIV” exists in individuals with a positive antibody test or AIDS?

  5. Tim Hunt said

    If anybody has any info about any HIV drugs that directly inhibit IL-10 production please share it with us as this could explain rising CD4 counts and decreased viral load for some medicated individuals for completely non-virological reasons i.e their viral load drops because their excessive IL-10(a TH2 cytokine) production is lowered by drugs which automatically increases the TH1 response as there is a reciprocal inhibition between TH1 and TH2 cytokines which quite simply will improve the outcome of any immunocompromised patient as their TH1/cell-mediated immunity is noprmally shot to bits.

  6. cathy said

    Thanks for that information on IL-10 Tim – also of note is that SSRIs can upregulate IL-10 and in pregnancy it is also elevated – described as “the facilitator of successful pregnancy”. Is IL-10 the “smoking gun” of HIV-AIDS?

  7. Philip said

    This fits with a study Myron Essex came up with years ago, where up to 70% of people EXPOSED (mind you, not even sick of, but just exposed) to TB and leprosy can test HIV positive. But do you see this study trumpeted anywhere?

  8. Martin said

    Hi Dr. Bauer, Regarding Manuel Fernandes’ proposition — essentially a Koch Postulate validation of HIV. Here is an analogy: The great psychologist, Dr. Evelyn Hooker, compared gay and straight college students (both groups had never been in “therapy”) using an MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory). She then gave the test results of the two groups to a battery of psychologists to try to differentiate the gays from the straights. They were unable to differentiate the groups by trying to find more “psychopathology” in the gay group than in the straight group. The “establishment” psychiatrists and psychoanalysts were unconvinced — i.e. the test was simply not good enough because they “knew” that homosexuality was ipso facto a psychopathology. (Psychopathology to me is a pseudo-medical construct much like AIDS. Hooker was playing by the Establishment rules as though there was an objective way to count angels.)

    Here with “AIDS” we have a similar situation where the possibility of a non-Establishment group of scientists unofficially tries to isolate HIV from a patient. Who in the Establishment would believe them? The earth does not revolve around the sun!

    • Henry Bauer said

      Martin:
      You’re right, it’s part of the problem, the HIV/AIDS theorists refuse to pay attention to anything Rethinkers bring up, no matter how factual.

  9. Tim Hunt said

    I have just re-read Cantwell and Broxmeyers “Is HIV a virus-like form of acid-fast Tuberculosis-type bacteria?” and more connections between TB and HIV seem apparent.

    Quotes:

    “In a startling new report, a team of Slovakian
    researchers headed by Vladimir Zajac has found
    genetic sequences of HIV ( the human
    immunodeficiency virus) in various bowel bacteria
    cultured from AIDS patients. It is well-known that HIV
    attacks blood cells of the immune system, but this is
    the first study indicating HIV can also infect bacteria
    naturally contained within the body. This novel finding
    gives rise to further questions concerning the
    transmissibility of HIV and the role that HIV-infected
    bacteria play in the transformation of HIV infection to
    full-blown clinical AIDS.”

    “Further complicating the precise role of bacteria in
    AIDS is the fact that bacteria can be infected with
    viruses called “bacteriophages” or phage, for short.
    There is no evidence to suggest that HIV is a phage.
    However, the reality that viruses commonly infect
    bacteria gives further credence to Zajac’s discovery
    of HIV genes in bacteria. Are tuberculous
    mycobacteria in AIDS patients infected with HIV, or do
    they generate the virus? No one seems to know.”

    I think there is a possible connection that could be made with the recent Italian discovery that HIV kills cancer cells that there is a possibility that HIV could be more of a bacteriophage than is recognised as an anti cancer effect is characteristic of bacteriophages according to a hypothesis from the Polish Academy of Sciences who are the world leaders in “Phage” research[1].

    A starting point for some more research I think.

    [1]New insights into the possible role of bacteriophages in host defense and disease.

  10. Alan said

    http://drbroxmeyer.netfirms.com/001_pdf_IS_AIDS_REALLY_CAUSED_BY_A_VIRUS.pdf

    Above is a link relevent to the discussion — a paper which preceded the study mentioned.

  11. vito d. said

    There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Broxmeyer’s original paper as well as Cantwell and Broxmeyer’s collaborative follow-up are the most accurate depiction of AIDS out there.

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