HIV/AIDS Skepticism

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

The case against HIV

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2010/04/17

It’s generally believed that HIV causes AIDS, in part because it seems incredible that “science” could be so wrong. But history of science teaches that it’s anything but incredible.

The considerable evidence that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS includes:
— Lack of correlation between HIV numbers and AIDS numbers
— No correlation among “viral load”, CD4 counts, and clinical prognosis
— Published data on deaths and “infections” show no sign of purported latent period: “infection”, symptoms, deaths all show the same age distribution peaking in early middle age
— Impossible level of promiscuity needed to explain African prevalence of “HIV-positive”
— Failure of every vaccine trial
— Failure of every microbicide, even those containing antiretroviral drugs
— Constant number of “HIV-positive” Americans for three decades
— Constant demographics of “HIV” by age. race, and sex
— No actually observed sexual transmission
— Condom use has no effect on incidence of “HIV-positive”
— Pregnant women more likely to become “HIV-positive”
— Health-care workers at no risk of infection
— More breastfeeding protects babies against becoming “HIV-positive”

AIDS is a lifestyle phenomenon, not an infectious ailment.

“HIV” is a misnomer for misinterpreted “HIV” tests.

HIV/AIDS theory became established as a result of political and social pressures, not because of scientific evidence.

Those points are set out in a just-published article in EdgeScience — Current Research and Insights, #3 (April-June 2010) 6-8.  The magazine is published by the Society for Scientific Exploration and edited by Patrick Huyghe, a science writer whose credits include many articles in such major magazines as OMNI and co-authorship of books with scientists, for example, with (Louis A. Frank) The Big Splash. The Journal of Scientific Exploration,  founded in 1987, contains peer-reviewed and rather technical articles; EdgeScience is intended to make technical matters accessible to a general audience.

16 Responses to “The case against HIV”

  1. mo79uk said

    I’m going to use those bullet points the next time I debate with someone on HIV/AIDS — which unfortunately is not often.

    I met Joan Shenton a few days ago as I discovered she lives within walking distance from me. I hope she gets enough funds to keep the IRF site running. Many brilliant documentaries on there. Her work is amazing.

  2. Martin said

    I hope the article in EdgeScience gets wide publication. I would gather as more “common” people get acquainted with AIDS dissidence and the lack of logic of mainstream propaganda, less money will be donated and there will be less public support. Also when the mainstream media like The New York Times starts printing articles, editorial letters and Op Eds with the dissident point of view we will see the end of AIDS. Unfortunately for the time being, accurate reporting is not what the mainstream media do. I just read a book review by Dr. Rosen in the Boston Globe “G” section on a new book by Robert Whitaker (a journalist and psychiatric apologist) that criticises Whitaker by comparing him to Thabo Mbeki. Now Rosen said in the review that Mbeki’s AIDS policies were responsible for an estimated 365,000 premature deaths but evidently was not interested in the actual data (about 14,000) — Rosen criticised Whitaker for doing the same thing: substituting hypothesis for data.

  3. BradS said

    how about:
    – phenomenally heterogeneous clinical manifestations for an organism with only 9 genes – immune collapse – or wait – is it immune stimulation? – dementia; heart disease; hiding out in the lymphatic system, or is it the bone marrow, or is it the brain; what else?

    – I haven’t gotten around to this yet but I’d be curious to see what it is those 9 genes code for: don’t we wind up with only 4 or 5 malevolent genes whereas the rest are common to all harmless retroviruses

    – at the same time a limited number of defining diseases which are different for each risk group – one would think that if the immune system really collapsed one would get EVERYTHING – not a small group of indicator diseases

    – I have lost track of how many ‘strains’, ‘clades’, cross infections are out there – and at the same time the virus is mutating so furiously that this is even considered an issue

    – what was that mechanism of damage to the immune system again?

    – most damning – inability to locate the virus in vivo in a patient sick with AIDS

    – it is oddly very difficult to transmit the virus in a sero-discordant couple – and yet at the start of the ‘epidemic’ it seemed to be extremely infectious

  4. Gorky said

    Maybe it’s humility, so he doesn’t mention it, but Bauer was a senior editor at JSE for years, until when (offhand I can’t recall), two years ago or so? Well Bauer can inform us, if he so wishes.

    EdgeScience is a great new addition to the SSE stable and I hope it gets a lot of attention among those interested in real science and not merely ensnared in ovine reverence to whatever Nature and Science sell to their readership. This is the third issue of course, the first two are also available free on-line and I recommend them to anybody interested in what’s really going on in cutting-edge science.

    • Henry Bauer said

      I am a very humble person indeed, thank you (tongue held firmly in my cheek), but I didn’t mention editing JSE because I didn’t think it was relevant. Full disclosure now is that I was editor from 2000 to 2007 and resigned because HIV/AIDS stuff had become my chief interest and was consuming all available “discretionary” time.

  5. Gos said

    Excellent article, but I’ve found what I think is an error:

    “HIV was only found in two-thirds of all AIDS cases”

    If my memory serves, then Prof. Bauer has the ratio reversed. Gallo was UNABLE to find HIV in two-thirds of AIDS cases.

    • Henry Bauer said

      You are absolutely right. Gallo claimed to find “HIV” in 26 of 72 AIDS patients (and in 18 of 21 “pre-AIDS”). I’m really frustrated at these lapses of memory or attention, which I ascribe to having reched “the golden years” of life.

  6. mo79uk said

    New video on BBC:

    It’s funny, near the end they say they’re not going after the virus itself but “holes in the immune system”…In effect, indirectly echoing the rethinking line. If Montagnier’s French can be misunderstood, Scott Kitchen’s clear American English cannot be.

  7. Martin said

    Hi Dr. Bauer, Here’s another one to add to the list. I just saw it on ARAS.
    “1. SUMMARY: On November 2, the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (HHS/CDC), published a Final Rule in the Federal Register that will remove HIV infection from the list of communicable diseases of public health significance and remove references to HIV from the scope of medical examinations for aliens. The final rule will go into effect on January 4, 2010. This cable provides guidance to posts for handling cases involving HIV after January 4, 2010, and in the interim. END SUMMARY. ”

    Should I interpret this to mean HIV infection (at least to the US government) really isn’t a threat we should be concerned with?
    If my interpretation is correct, and assuming (a) HIV exists, (b) it’s contagious and (c) it causes AIDS (whatever that is), that the real data on its contagiousness and dangerousness has been duly put in its place – by the US government no less!

    • Henry Bauer said

      HIV is a dangerous communicable disease only when it is convenient and politically correct and financially advantageous. for example, in southern Africa. In the United States, it is not a dangerous communicable disease when it causes stigma and harms foreign relations, but it IS a dangerous communicable disease for the purpose of research funding and supporting activist groups.
      You may have temporarily forgotten that HV/AIDS exists in Alice’s Wonderland:
      “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean –– neither more nor less.”
      “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
      “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – that’s all.”

      • Martin said

        The emperor indeed has no clothes. I had not actually read carefully (as a kid) Lewis Carroll’s “Alice in Wonderland”. Most of us read (or might have read) it as children. More (including me) had probably seen many of the cinematic versions since it is visually adaptable to that medium. By speaking through the characters, he revealed much of his personality (my hypothesis) as a good satirist. Of course HIV/AIDS is but one of many things that the goverment (in power) will speak out of both sides of its mouth about.

  8. adaptableskeptic said

    I visited a well known internist in the area, Rebecca Kuhn, for potential primary care. She has a large “HIV” patient portfolio. After much discussion and questioning (most of which she was unable to answer rationally) she finally admitted that “HIV” is “most likely” caused by multiple factors. I then asked her if it might be prudent to actually determine what those other factors are before prescribing toxic drugs for life. No response. Needless to say, I have no intention of seeing her for any medical treatment. I then Googled her name and found out she is one of these goofy Evangelical Christians. Funny how one baseless mythology leads to another.

  9. mo79uk said

    Measles mimics ‘HIV seroconversion’:

  10. Francis said

    So a dose of measles can get you an AIDS diagnosis now, including PCP and Herpes Simplex all at once. Then written off as looking like “seroconversion sicknes”s hence the misdiagnoses. The poor woman is just fortunate she wasn’t one of the high percentage who test false positive under such circumstances. As it was they fed her high-dose prednisone which is immune suppressive and then topped it off with I.V. acyclovir, a wonder they didn’t throw in a pinch of AZT or Nevirapine to make sure.

    My reading (orthodox) reveals seroconversion sickness is usually a mild flu-like illness, not PCP, the hallmark of severe immune depression. Perhaps the strangest part of this fiasco is that she had been immunised against measles. Much as had the majority of the victims in the recent UK measles outbreak.

    One of the silliest things I have read lately was the recent posting on DeShong’s blog where “anonymous” posted 4 references to exclusive breast-feeding by HIV-positive mothers being protective against HIV transmission by avoiding the infant drinking the local water The response from Mr Poodle Stomper [SNOUT], AIDS apologist lieutenant, is a classic.

    Poodle Stomper said…
    “I could be wrong (it has been a while since I’ve read up on this particular issue) but I believe the increase in transmission was due to lesions caused by pathogens in the water which allowed HIV to enter the bloodstream more efficiently. I could be wrong, though.”
    April 27, 2010 6:40 AM

    That’s right up there with “Foreskin Theory”, “Make-it-up-as-you-go-along Doctrine” and perhaps the best, co-locating HIV clinics in TB clinics in Africa or mass HIV testing in antenatal clinics. Suffice to say, mycobacterial infections and pregnancies are well documented cross-reactors with HIV tests. You’re guaranteed high “infection” rates.

    Whilst I’m picking on the ministries of silly talks. Dr Luc Montagnier has for some time been espousing the merits of taking fermented papaya products in the treatment of AIDS, whilst also taking the pharmaceutical pills (fence-sitting again). What I don’t get there is that the active ingredient in papaya is papain, a protease. HAART always includes a Protease Inhibitor, can someone explain the logic of that one for me?

    The world would be a far healthier place if only they’d ditch the dangerous HIV tests and concentrate on what is making people ill.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Seroconversion sickness is another example of an HIV/AIDS shibboleth constructed out of plain guesswork cloth: no one knows, in any given specific case, when “infection” actually occurred, because there’s no way to detect it. So you ask people who test positive whether they’ve had any slight fevers, chills, sniffles, etc., during the last X months…. Unsurprisingly, people who have just visited a doctor because of some symptoms or other, can indeed recall one or more such episodes within the last few months. Many people could.
      Poodle-Stomping SNOUT is right up there with the official reason why breast-feeding exclusively guards against “HIV”: one of the proteins in supplements used in “milk substitute formula” catalyzes absorption of “HIV”.
      With explanations like that, evidence and facts are quite superfluous.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: