HIV/AIDS Skepticism

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

Spontaneously generated HIV

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2011/03/09

HIV/AIDS true-believers seem content to find “HIV” even when there is no conceivable source of it: not infected needles, not sexual intercourse, not blood transfusion, not via breast milk . . . . [Spontaneous generation of “HIV”, 2009/10/25]. Here’s another example of that:

A 13-year-old Indian girl presented with symptoms that defied diagnosis:
Jhuma Sankar, Dinesh Raj, Jeeva Sankar, Pradeep K. Sharma, Rakesh Lodha & S. K. Kabra, “HIV infection mimicking autoimmune disorder”, Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 74 [2007] 777-80.

The girl had been hospitalized several times before: at 6 months for diarrhea; at 6 years with pneumonia; and at 13 with humoral immune deficiency and collagen vascular diseases (which include autoimmune diseases like lupus and rheumatoid arthritis), and she was tested inconclusively for tuberculosis. The girl was treated with intravenous antibiotics, and discharged. But two months later she was back in hospital. Further tests were now done, including for HIV even though there were absolutely no known risk factors for it (including healthy parents) and some of the laboratory tests were like those associated with lupus. Nevertheless, treatment for the girl’s manifest symptoms was augmented with antiretrovirals: nevirapine, lamivudine, and stavudine. Twenty days later, the girl was dead.

Of course, she might well have died even without the antiretroviral drugs. But feeding her such toxic substances when she was already gravely ill could hardly have helped.

I find it remarkable that there is no discussion in this article of how the girl is supposed to have become infected with HIV. One has to conclude that these physicians are unaware of the fact that a large variety of illnesses and other physiological conditions can falsely deliver “positive” “HIV” tests. They are far from alone in this, of course; but it still seems like malpractice, if that can include incompetence .

6 Responses to “Spontaneously generated HIV”

  1. Martin said

    Hi Dr. Bauer, It’s obvious to me with respect to incompetence, these Indian doctors are in very good company. HIV has blinded virtually everyone in the medical establishment with blinders that hide common sense.

  2. Rajesh said

    I am from India and my district of Yavatmal had a population of 2,458,271 according to the 2001 Census. District Medical Office data stated that from 2007 to October 2010, 116,973 men were tested for HIV, of whom 8,183 were found HIV+; and 95,967 pregnant women were tested out of whom 359 were found HIV+. But the amazing thing is that only 87 deaths from AIDS were registered in 23 years.
    Also in the state of Goa, where the first case of HIV was registered in 1987 and which is a famous tourist destination for foreigners, over 9,000 case of HIV+ were registered but only 723 deaths from AIDS over a period of 23 years.
    Do these data look like the epidemiology of a deadly virus?
    This shows that a large number of cases are simply false +.

  3. Martin said

    Hi Rajesh, There is no such thing as a false positive because HIV has never been isolated from any human being, ever. Until a test is validated, its accuracy and reliability can not be determined. That has never been performed with either the ELISA or Western Blot. That the transubstantiation of this fraud into a legitimately accepted diagnostic indicator is a very bad sign.

    • Henry Bauer said

      Martin:
      Of course you’re right. Nevertheless, for people who know little or nothing about all this, “false positive” gives the correct impression, I think, namely that the “positive infection” inference is wrong — irrespective of the “existence” issue.

  4. julianna kenny said

    Do you think we are getting a little dogmatic about the viral theory of AIDS — i.e. HIV = AIDS? That the test for all its flaws could or may be a signifier for some disease activity, and I think it is clear now that these antiretrovirals — so many classes with such different functions, it would be better they were not labelled ARVs at all — are now being transferred and tested for new applications. This is the plan with all of this stable of chemo treatment, isn’t it — to test them on as many ‘immune’ related diseases they can and see if they have multiple applications, HIV or no HIV+ status.

    • Henry Bauer said

      julianna kenny:
      “Do you think we are getting a little dogmatic about the viral theory of aids – i.e. HIV = AIDS?”
      I take this as a nice tongue-in-cheek query 8)
      The dogmatism has been a disaster for innumerable people. However, the suggestion that a positive “HIV” test might reflect some sort of health threat is also one that I make in my book: the average “HIV+” rate differs between social sectors precisely as would be expected if “HIV+” corresponds roughly to some sort of unusual physiological state. But it needn’t be health-threatening, for example pregnancy tends to yield HIV+ results.
      As to trying ARVs in other situations, this is the normal way in which drug companies carry on. It’s called “repositioning” drugs. Once a drug has been approved for something, it’s much easier to get it approved for something else because supposedly its safety has already been established, so it’s much cheaper to get that later approval. Not often pointed out is that this common practice proves how significant are so-called “side” effects. When approved against illness “A”, Pharma emphasizes that it does just what’s wanted to fight “A” and that one shouldn’t worry about “side” effects. Yet it’s precisely one of those “side” effects that is then ballyhooed as the drug’s PRIMARY effect when it’s re-positioned against “B”.

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