Highest Military Court rules HIV not likely to be spread through unprotected sex

A few weeks ago I reported (HIV/AIDS theory cannot stand up in court) the wonderful victory achieved by the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice in convincing the Military Court of Appeal that the risk of transmitting “HIV” through sexual intercourse is negligible. Here is a Press Release sent out by Joan Shenton in Britain that gives a fuller report and analysis of the significance:

Court of Appeals rules HIV not likely to be spread through unprotected sex
2015-03-30

March 30, 2015, London, UK. Press Dispensary. In a landmark legal case that has received little attention outside the United States, the highest military court in the US recently overturned decades of judgements regarding the likelihood of spreading HIV through unprotected sex.

In late February, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) unanimously threw out a 2011 conviction against a US airman, Sergeant David Gutierrez of Kansas, for committing “aggravated assault” when exposing multiple sex partners to HIV at swinger parties in Wichita. According to defence attorney Kevin McDermott, the decision reversed a 25-year precedent that had allowed military personnel to be convicted of aggravated assault solely on the basis of a positive HIV test.

“The key to the decision was that the convicted airman was not accused of actually infecting anyone with HIV, only of having had sex with them after a positive HIV test, and his conviction was overturned because the US government could not prove that any of his acts were likely to transmit HIV to his partners. The second highest court in America has unanimously rubbished the myth that being found HIV positive makes someone an automatic risk to others.”

So said Joan Shenton, London-based author of the recently republished anniversary edition of the book “Positively False – Exposing the Myths around HIV and AIDS”.

Shenton continued: “The US government was unable to prove a likelihood that an HIV person is a risk, even during unprotected sex, because there is no proof. And if the transmission of HIV is now in such doubt, the entire edifice of the infectious hypothesis for AIDS will surely come tumbling down.”

Positively False – 16th Anniversary Edition

The absence of any definitive medical evidence about HIV transmission was highlighted when defence lawyers argued the risk ranged from a 1-in-10,000 to 1-in-100,000 chance per sexual encounter and prosecutors countered that the exposure risk was closer to 1 in 500. The court determined that even if the risk were 1 in 500, transmission of the disease was not “likely” to occur.

Clark Baker, of the Office of Medical Science and Justice (OMSJ), which was the driving force behind Sergeant Gutierrez’s appeal, said this week:
“While gratified that the highest US military court unanimously agrees that HIV does not pose the existential threat claimed by government-funded propagandists, I am sickened by the millions of innocents around the world whose lives have been destroyed by this $400 billion marketing scam to promote unreliable tests to sell deadly HIV drugs. This ruling is long overdue.”

David Crowe, president of Rethinking AIDS, said this week:
“HIV is the only disease to be highly criminalized in the modern era. If courts truly believed in ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’, they would not rely on tests that produce false positives that cannot be eliminated, nor on biased analyses that cannot tell the direction of transmission, but do set juries in the direction of conviction. Society talks about privacy of an HIV diagnosis, but then mandates that all HIV+ people reveal their status, unless they want to remain celibate for life while still facing the likelihood of isolation, prejudice and violence if their status becomes public.”

Dr Christian Fiala, medical director of the Gynmed clinic in Vienna, added this week:
“This ruling confirms what is evident from all epidemiological and medical studies: there is no heterosexual transmission of HIV or any illness labelled as AIDS. This ruling also takes into consideration the fundamental problems and contradictions of the HIV test and the definition of AIDS, which has been changed several times over the last 30 years and which is very different in different countries. Even the manufacturer of the HIV test states ‘At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence of absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.’*

“It is now up to other courts and governments to recognize the clear evidence and to stop terrorizing those who are labelled HIV positive.”

Joan Shenton concluded:
“For everyone who has long argued that those found HIV positive are not automatically guilty of some heinous crime if they have unprotected sex, this is one of the most significant court judgements in years, particularly as it was a unanimous verdict from the highest military court in the US. Potentially it unlocks the shackles for millions of people worldwide who have been declared HIV positive.”

Joan Shenton’s seminal book, “Positively False – Exposing the Myths around HIV and AIDS”, was first published in 1998. The thoroughly updated anniversary edition was launched at London’s Frontline Club in February, together with a new film, Positive Hell. Both are raising the temperature once more on the HIV and AIDS controversy.

* See Abbott Laboratories Package Insert – http://aidswiki.net/documents/AbbottHIVEIA.pdf Page 6, under Sensitivity and Specificity.

– ends –

Notes for editors
The full ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces was decided on February 23, 2015, and may be downloaded as a PDF: http://www.omsj.org/cases/2010/Gutierrez/2015/ruling2015.pdf

Joan Shenton
Joan Shenton has extensive experience of producing and presenting television and radio programmes, including many peak time network documentaries for the BBC, Channel 4, Central TV, and Thames TV.

Her independent production company Meditel Productions has won seven television awards and was the first independent company ever to win a Royal Television Society Award for an episode of Channel 4’s Dispatches. It has produced eight network documentaries for Channel 4, Sky News and M-Net, South Africa on the AIDS debate. “AIDS – The Unheard Voices” won the Royal Television Society Award for Current Affairs.

Her book Positively False – Exposing the Myths around HIV and AIDS was originally published by I.B. Tauris in 1998 and is now not only reprinted but updated, including contributions from 20 leading dissident scientists and journalists, plus Peter Duesberg et al.’s withdrawn 2009 paper for Medical Hypothesis and the script of the film Positively False.

Positively False – Birth of a Heresy, a 90 minute documentary co-produced with director Andi Reiss, was nominated for best documentary at Lucerne and Marbella international film festivals.

David Crowe
David Crowe HSBC (Hons), biology/mathematics, is president of Rethinking AIDS, and founder and president of the Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society.

Clark Baker
Clark Baker is CEO and Principal Investigator at the Office of Medical Science and Justice (OMSJ) and is based in Los Angeles.

Having conducted thousands of criminal and civil investigations since 1980 with the LAPD and as a licensed investigator, Mr. Baker founded OMSJ in 2009 after witnessing the reluctance of government agencies and research centres to investigate allegations related to medical and scientific corruption (aka junk science).

Mr. Baker has earned more than eighty commendations from local, state and federal officials.
http://www.omsj.org

Dr Christian Fiala
Christian Fiala is a specialist in obstetrics and gynaecology. He is medical director of the Gynmed clinic in Vienna.
Positively False
POSITIVELY FALSE – Exposing the Myths around HIV and AIDS
16th anniversary edition by Joan Shenton
Print ISBN 9781503030886

Available in paperback and Kindle from Amazon. Visit www.positivelyfalsebook.com for links.

Blind leading the blind: drugs, needles, “HIV”

Three decades ago, John Lauritsen pointed out that the way in which the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) categorized AIDS patients was fatally misleading, masking the plain fact that the chief “risk group” comprised drug addicts. A decade earlier, Gordon Stewart had observed the symptoms of ill health typical among drug abusers to include opportunistic infections — much the same as those of “AIDS” sufferers.

But the disaster of HIV/AIDS theory ascribes the ill health to “HIV” instead of to the drugs, leading to official promotion of needle-exchange programs: giving drug injectors clean needles to use so that they will not spreads the putative virus among themselves by sharing “infected” needles.

As it happens, actual follow-up has demonstrated that needle-exchange programs tend to increase rather than decrease the incidence of “HIV-positive”.

But official statements continue to claim the opposite of what the evidence shows. Part of the reason is that official statements are typically composed by specialist writers, public-relations personnel, who are indoctrinated to the same beliefs as the general public and whose jobs do not include familiarity with the technical literature: Official reports are not scientific documents (chapter 8 in Dogmatism in Science and Medicine: How Dominant Theories Monopolize Research and Stifle the Search for Truth, McFarland 2012) . Consequently, ABC News can report what it learns “from the CDC” as “Answers to common questions about HIV, needles and drug use”:

“WHAT ROLE DO DIRTY NEEDLES PLAY IN HIV?

HIV is a blood-borne infection, spread mostly through sex. Intravenous drug users, who sometimes share dirty syringes, account for 8 percent of new HIV infections and 16 percent of people currently living with HIV in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The good news is there’s been progress in curbing infections, largely because of needle-exchange and drug-treatment programs. New HIV infections among drug users dropped from a peak of nearly 35,000 annually in the late 1980s to 3,900 in 2010, the CDC says.

———

WHAT’S THE LEGAL STATUS OF NEEDLE EXCHANGES?

Laws criminalizing possession and distribution of syringes have been removed or relaxed in 26 states and the District of Columbia, according to the public health law research program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Fifteen states and the District of Columbia explicitly authorize syringe exchange.

Congress does not allow for the use of CDC funds to pay for syringe-exchange programs. In 2011, a formal determination by the surgeon general permitted spending federal block grant money on syringe programs.

———

WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH SAY?

Multiple studies have found that needle-exchange programs reduce needle sharing and the risk of HIV transmission. Studies have also shown the programs promote drug addicts to get into treatment.”

 

Relying on “scientific” advice, the Republican Governor of Indiana, Mike Spence, has allowed a needle-exchange program after an “epidemic” of “HIV” among injecting drug abusers (Indiana HIV outbreak reaches ‘epidemic proportions’).

Spence is opposed in principle to needle exchanges, understanding that it does not serve the health of individuals or the public to abet drug abuse. But such is the status and prestige of “Science”, and such is the confusion between actual scientific knowledge and what is put out by bureaucracies, that his common sense and sense of morality bowed to the “experts”.

In the “epidemic” in Scott County IN, “the vast majority of the people who’ve become infected during the outbreak shared a syringe with someone else while injecting a liquid form of the prescription painkiller Opana” (Indiana to declare public health emergency over HIV outbreak tied to IV drug use).

The real explanation of what happened, of course, is that Opana conduces to testing “HIV-positive”; innumerable things that conduce to testing “HIV-positive” (section 3.2 in The Case against HIV ).

Superb accuracy (99.8%) of HIV tests in Britain

A correspondent in Britain sent me this e-mail:

“These jokers do a “99.8% accurate” hiv test:
https://www.medichecks.com/find-a-test/tests/HIV-and-AIDS_24/

plus a “confirmation” test of hiv
(Vidas HIV1/HIV2 Duo Quick, Bispot Immunocomb HIV1/HIV2, Determine HIV1&2)
https://www.medichecks.com/find-a-test/test/HIV-Confirmation-Test_HIVC/

Are they lying?!”

 

I wrote direct to the responsible (?) organization and received this enlightening response:

 

“Dear Dr Bauer,
Thank you for your enquiry.
Information regarding the tests and accuracy comes from the laboratory, we send our samples to the largest laboratory in the UK which has all the necessary accreditations.
If you require further information or have any questions or queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Kind regards,
Emma Musson
Patient Services
MediChecks.com Ltd
Navigation House
48 Mill Gate
Newark
Nottingham
NG24 4TS
ENGLAND

t +44 (0) 1636 640195
f +44 (0) 1636 640218
www.medichecks.com
info@medichecks.com

follow us on Twitter 

join our FaceBook community

REGISTERED NO: 4053644
REGISTERED IN ENGLAND & WALES”

It’s certainly reassuring that MediChecks relies on “the largest laboratory in the UK which has all the necessary accreditations”. I leave it to any interested others to look into further details of that lab, which I would guess is a commercial entity.

Loch Ness Monsters again

HIV/AIDS groupies and vigilantes like to assert — most recently in attempting to critique Patricia Goodson’s fine review of 30 years of failed HIV/AIDS theory (Questioning the HIV-AIDS hypothesis: 30 years of dissent) — that my interest in the possible existence of “Loch Ness Monsters” marks me as not to be listened to about anything, no matter the evidence I adduce. In response, some years ago I detailed what my “belief” about Nessies actually is (Henry Bauer and the Loch Ness monsters). Later that year I posted a Tribute to Robert Rines, who had carried out some of the most ingenious modern searches for the creatures (Science, media, and Loch Ness “monsters”).

Some of the most objective and compelling evidence for the existence of these creatures comes from sonar (“The Case for the Loch Ness Monster: The Scientific Evidence”, Journal of Scientific Exploration, 16(2): 225–246 [2002]) and a few underwater photos taken simultaneously with sonar echoes, but such technical stuff is less subjectively convincing than “seeing with one’s own eyes”. For the latter, there is no substitute for the film taken by Tim Dinsdale in 1960. Recently Tim’s son Angus published a book, The Man Who Filmed Ness: Tim Dinsdale and the Enigma of Loch Ness, whose website contains a link  that enables anyone to see the film itself on-line. Grainy as the film is, small as the Nessie’s back may seem at the range of a mile, you need to know only one thing to judge its significance:

The most determined debunkers, of whom there have been quite a few, have been able to suggest only one alternative explanation to this being a film of a large unidentified creature, of a species far larger than anything know to be in Loch Ness: That what seems to be a black hump, curved in cross-section and length, which submerges but continues to throw up a massive wake, is actually a boat with an outboard motor. Several magnified and computer-enhanced frames of the massive wake on my website show quite clearly that nothing material is visible above the wake after the hump has submerged.

If the most dedicated “skeptics” can offer no better explanation than this, then I feel justified in believing that Dinsdale filmed a genuine Nessie.
It reminds me of the Christian apologist, I think probably G. K. Chesterton or Malcolm Muggeridge, who remarked that the best argument for the truth of Christianity is the attempts by disbelievers to discredit it.
If there is one thing that the hump filmed by Dinsdale is certainly NOT, it’s a boat with an outboard motor.

HIV/AIDS theory cannot stand up in court

That is to say, it cannot stand up in court if lawyers know what they are doing; and they can know what they are doing if they have the assistance of the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice (OMSJ).

Several earlier blog posts have reported successful outcomes as a result of OMSJ intervention. Now they have won a case that is likely to have far-reaching consequences.

The story began 4 years ago: “Sex, Lies, Vaccines and the Destruction of Sgt. David Gutierrez”. Finally something very good has come out of it: “OMSJ: Military Appeals Court Overturns HIV Conviction”.

Hear from the lead attorney about the significance of this victory: “Just like that, about 25 years of risking an ‘aggravated assault’ or similar charge for not informing a sexual partner that you’re ‘HIV positive’ are effectively over. On February 23, 2015, the highest U.S. military court judged the risk of contracting ‘HIV’ from sex as so low that it is no longer a serious crime not to tell sexual partners”.

The facts have been crystal clear for a long time, that HIV/AIDS theory is bankrupt and has done and continues to do enormous damage to innumerable people (The Case against HIV). But people cannot be forced to look at or admit facts — except (at least sometimes) in court, where HIV/AIDS experts can be cross-examined and their misguided beliefs exposed as such.

When the era of HIV/AIDS finally ends, enormous credit will be owing to the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice.