HIV/AIDS Skepticism

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

You are ill — because we say you are

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2010/10/04

Untold millions of people around the world are both “HIV-positive” and perfectly healthy.

UNAIDS estimates around 30-35 million total “HIV-positives” globally.
It’s claimed by UNAIDS and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that no less than ¼ and up to ½ of those don’t know they’re “HIV-positive”. So those who don’t know their “poz” status number anywhere between about 8 and 18 million.
Once you are ill, of course, you find out whether you’re “poz”.
Therefore a significant proportion of those 8-18 million are perfectly healthy “HIV-positives” — “elite controllers” or “long-term non-progressors”, according to the orthodoxy.
A more precise calculation using the more precise numbers available for the United States from the 1980s forward, for deaths as well as for “infection” rates, reveals that about 50% of all “HIV-positives” — those who would test “poz” if there were universal testing — are long-term non-progressors or elite controllers — because if they were not, then the numbers of deaths since the early 1980s would have been far larger than they have been.

A better way of putting this is that “HIV” tests cannot diagnose purported infection by HIV, as stated in test kits and pointed out in authoritative texts (“HIV” tests are self-fulfilling prophecies, 10 May 2009). A whole host of physiological conditions can deliver a “positive” “HIV” result; among the most common ones are drug abuse, tuberculosis, pregnancy, and being of African ancestry.

So to the case of Nadja Benaissa, a popular singer recently convicted in Germany of having sex while “HIV-positive” and actually infecting one of her lovers. I read about this while I was in Montreux (see “Why ethics matters in science”, 2010/09/28),  and was struck by these details:
1. The prosecutor recommended only a suspended sentence because the “crime” had been committed long ago when she was much younger.
Indeed! Nadja radiates health, despite having been “HIV-positive” for a long time, and she shows none of the “side” effects that would be so visible were she on antiretroviral treatment.
2. Nadja was a drug addict when she became pregnant at age 16, a dozen years ago: so she had at least 2 of the most common reasons for testing “HIV-positive”. (I’ve lost the clipping of that story; it was probably on or about August 26 or 27 in either the International Herald-Tribune or USA Today, photocopies of which were available in my hotel).

Comprehensive analyses of this case are available at the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice, OMSJ —. “Nadja: German show trial for the HIV/AIDS paradigm” and  “Nadja’s choice”.

There’s always too much too read. My Blogroll is already too large for me to scan routinely, but I hope readers of this blog do sample those links periodically. I recently added OMSJ because of its up-to-date and comprehensive coverage. Rethinking AIDS and ARAS are also indispensable for keeping up with what’s happening.

Back to the theme: “You are ill — because we say so”:
Uncountable millions of people are ill with HIV/AIDS solely because they’ve been told they are, either on the basis in Africa of the non-specific Bangui definition or elsewhere on the basis of unapproved “HIV” tests — approved for screening blood, not for diagnosing individual infection; and in the United States on the basis of low CD4 counts in peripheral blood, which have never been shown to be a health hazard and which are not accepted as a relevant criterion outside the USA.
“HIV” tests become self-fulfilling prophecies  because antiretroviral treatment is capable of producing the clinical symptoms associated with AIDS; as well as a host of additional ones, like “HIV lipodystrophy” or various cancers, none of which were part of the AIDS syndrome in the early 1980s and only became part of it after antiretroviral drugs were introduced.

*                    *                    *                    *                    *                    *                    *                    *

The general circumstance that healthy people are told they are ill is by no means confined to HIV/AIDS, however; it has become quite routine as a result of the dominance of pharmaceutical industry in the funding of research and of clinical trials and in advising regulating agencies. Most at risk are all people healthy enough to grow older.
Increasingly, advertising by drug companies is designed to convince us that we are suffering from ailments that require treatment. We used to experience occasional heartburn when we had eaten too heartily, but nowadays any such occasions are signs of “acid reflux disease” that calls for taking the purple pill, and not just on a few occasions as we used to with Gelusil or Rolaids, but for life — that’s how drug companies can make real money, selling stuff that we are supposed to take lifelong.
Pre-menstrual tension becomes “premenstrual dysphoric disorder” that calls for Sarafem. Shyness becomes “social anxiety disorder” or “generalized anxiety disorder” to be treated by Paxil. Not getting an erection on demand becomes “erectile dysfunction” (Marcia Angell, The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It, 2004, pp. 86-9). In other words, pharmaceutical companies are nowadays not in the business of selling curatives, they are in the business of Selling Sickness (Ray Moynihan & Alan Cassels, Nation Books [New York] & Allen & Unwin [Sydney, Australia], 2005).
“Erectile dysfunction” is what happens to males who are lucky enough to live long enough. Females as well as males who are lucky enough to live long enough experience increasing blood pressure as a normal corollary of ageing; yet the medical industry seems obsessed with blood-pressure tests at every opportunity and the designation of arbitrary values that everyone should have irrespective of age; and to attain those levels there’s a host of drugs to be prescribed; and over the years the advisory bodies keep lowering what the “desirable” pressures are. To reach younger people, there was even invented the condition of  “prehypertension” (Moynihan and Cassels 2005: 86).
So too with blood sugar and pre-diabetes, and with cholesterol and LDL cholesterol and triglycerides. Yet the primary scientific literature reveals that as we age, higher cholesterol is better than lower: in a trial of simvastatin, all-cause mortality was lower  at cholesterol levels of 180-280 than at levels <180; and all-cause mortality was less with LDL levels of 120-200 than at levels <120 (Matsuzaki et al., Circulation Journal, 66 [2002] 1087-95; cited in Joel Kauffman, Malignant Medical Myths).
That book, Malignant Medical Myths, is by an impeccable researcher of the primary literature, an organic chemist formerly at the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia (earlier the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy & Science). The book exposes myths also about daily aspirin, low-carb diets, fluoridation, exercise, cancer treatments, dangers of low-level radiation, and more; all meticulously documented.

The successful marketing of drugs to be taken lifelong for conditions that are not illnesses owes something to the fact that a little learning is a dangerous thing, and something more to the perennial fallacy of taking correlation as an indication of causation. High blood pressure, high blood sugar, high cholesterol are “risk factors”: they are statistical correlations. In some studies of large numbers of people chosen at random, high blood pressure and high cholesterol appeared to correlate with heart disease. That’s precisely what you would find if the studies were not controlled by age-matched samples, because heart disease, blood pressure, and high cholesterol all normally become more common with increasing age: AGE is the cause and the others are symptoms. Ageing involves a great many changes in physiology, and one can reasonably doubt that lowering blood pressure or cholesterol levels or blood sugar can reverse ageing.
A little learning about risk factors — correlations — can be a dangerous thing for people, albeit a bonanza for drug companies.

10 Responses to “You are ill — because we say you are”

  1. Deadly Deception by, Robert E. Willnber M.D. Ph.D. The Proof That SEX And HIV Absolutely DO NOT CAUSE AIDS! “Must Read!”

    • John Samson said

      I agree, Great Book, Absolutly “Must Read!”
      But his name is spelled
      Robert E. WILLNER M.D. Ph.D.

  2. Francis said

    Having recently had a medical including a full spectrum of blood tests for my employer the results came back with the disturbing news that my cholesterol ratios were bad. I have more bad cholesterol than good and therefore am classified as “At Risk” for hardening of the arteries.

    My total cholesterol count?……..2.6. (recommended less than 5.5)

    The only surprise is they didn’t suggest a regimen of Lipitor for me. I’ve also found that when I drink to excess I too suffer “Erectile Dysfunction”, it seems to go away the next day though. Should I reach for the Viagra? Then I can have sex….but not remember it.

    I got referred to my G.P. for a Glucose Tolerance Test as my fasting blood sugar was 5.7. In Australia the recommended level is 5.6, but in the U.S. it is 6.0 (why are you different?) After a gulp of syrup and 2 hours of blood letting it fell to 4.1 (recommended less than 11.0) so no bad news there. He also ordered another full range of “bloods” duplicating the ones I’d had 2 weeks previous. Strangely my employer uses the IMVS pathology and my G.P. uses Abbotts. A comparison of the results showed not a single common measurement in anything, although Abbotts showed me to be generally healthier than the other.

    My home blood pressure monitor shows my pressure to be 120 over 75 (at home), at the doctor’s though it mysteriously jumps to 140-150 over 90 (white-coat fever). I do so enjoy those visits that in the last few years I’ve actually found the dentist to be a preferable option for an afternoon, the only bad news I get there is the need for a once-of filling and the suggestion that I floss more.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Francis:
      Yes.
      My personal anecdotes about having full physical exams regularly:
      Two weeks after a full physical including EKG, I fainted and subsequent tests showed a nearly blocked coronary artery (fixed by angioplasty a fewmonths later).
      10 years after that, again a few weeks after such a full exam, I was back in hospital having a quintuple by-pass.
      I had many stress tests before and after these episodes, and those stress tests didn’t detect my heart problems any more than the EKGs had.

  3. After reading your post, Henry, I couldn’t help but remember from some point in recent history of HIV dissidence, where a discussion was pointing to the newfangled, conjured up, vernacular, “HIV Disease”. Amazing marketing by the powers that be, because nowadays the term AIDS is quite often replaced by this grandiose mind-boggle misnomer. AIDS by definition is almost too complex for the masses to capture and hold. Ah, but the three capitalized fear-inducing initials followed by “disease” most certainly does.

    It comes as no surprise that gay men now embrace this as truism. They’ve come to own it almost outright. Proof of this, most all personal dating ads found in this group profoundly and routinely state, “Clean,” “Disease free” — UB2 (you should be too).

    • Henry Bauer said

      Brian Carter:
      Yes indeed.
      “HIV disease” is a very accurate description of today’s orthodoxy: anyone who is “poz”, according to tests never approved for diagnosis of “poz”, is ill by definition.
      Shortly thereafter, of course, they become actually ill from the peripheral neuropathy, wasting, lipodystrophy, and all the other effects of reverse-transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors and the other newer components of ART.

      • Henry,
        Correct, except hasn’t it been shown also, that merely receiving such a diagnosis, the fear and mental mind-fuck one must endure, will have a high likelihood to manifest strong and sometimes abundant stress related illness, no ART required? Even if one should shun the protocol, this instability most certainly will remain. True maybe for newly educated HIV positive dissidents too, who are just beginning to shun the whole thing. This is precisely why it’s so important for newbies to the dissent from HIV, stick with it and try to learn something new every day. It’s not always just the idea to not take anti-HIV meds. It’s much more deeper than that. Hell, I’m in for 6 something years and still learn something new, well, at least now and then.

      • Henry Bauer said

        Brian Carter:
        Thanks, a very important point.
        “Placebo effect” is a widely known phenomenon. “Nocebo effect” is not. Both refer to a mind-body interaction that occurs unconsciously. Studies of placebo have shown that a belief can exert a physiological effect that may be stronger than a drug: given a sleeping pill and told it’s an energizer, many people become energized, for example.
        Nocebo is just as powerful. Australian aborigines die when they are subjected to “bone pointing”; similar phenomena are associated with voodoo practices. Some studies have shown that non-superstitious Westerners are just as prone to such influences as are adherents of voodoo cults.
        There is sound evidence that the specific point made by Brian is extrememly important. Being told that you are ill, that you “have HIV”, can make you very ill.

  4. mo79uk said

    Unless I’ve got my facts wrong, I think it was also glossed over that Nadja Benaissa’s child is HIV negative. So she passed ‘it’ on to a lover where fluid transmission was minimal, but not to a being composed of her own blood.

    Dr. Malcolm Kendrick has a video on YouTube that relays a graph of WHO MONICA statistics for heart disease and there’s actually no real pattern between cholesterol and heart disease at all, though interestingly Australian Aborigines have the least cholesterol and the highest rate of heart disease. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8SSCNaaDcE
    The data this is taken from is also available on Google Books (search: MONICA, monograph and multimedia sourcebook)

    And it’s true, people forget that the medicine industry is a business…A drug dealer will never willingly provide the elixir that stops the customer from wanting their sustained fix. That’s not to negate the value of some wonderful medicines, but that is the truth.

    • Henry Bauer said

      mo79uk:
      Thanks, very interesting.
      And thanks too for reminding us that there are indeed some great medicines and some great medical procedures.
      The trouble is that commercialization over the last several decades has corrupted matters severely. In particular:
      — Allowing drug companies (only since the 1990s) to advertise prescription drugs to the public
      — Allowing federal officials in NIH to accept payments from drug companies, again only since the 1990s and thanks to Director Harold Varmus. (An illustration of the general principle that winners of Nobel Prizes should never be made administrators, illustrated perhaps most recently by Energy Secretary Chu)

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