HIV/AIDS Skepticism

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

Archive for the ‘HIV absurdities’ Category

HIV vaccine by — 2030

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2015/01/24

HIV Vaccine Will Be Ready By 2030, According To Bill Gates

No comment is needed, surely.

Just as well, because I wouldn’t know what to say or where to begin saying something.

Or maybe I could note that when I was still doing research, I would have hesitated to ask for funds on the grounds that I knew that I would get specific results after 15 years.

And further, I’m really quite curious to know what it is about the present state of knowledge that allows such an estimate to be made. It’s hard not to become jocular by referring to Nostradamus, extrasensory perception, and the like.

But then again, this is actually less into the future than the physicists’ estimates for a working nuclear fusion reactor.

Posted in experts, Funds for HIV/AIDS, HIV absurdities, HIV does not cause AIDS, vaccines | Tagged: | 15 Comments »

More innocent victims of HIV/AIDS witch-hunt mania

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2014/12/30

It’s been known for more than a couple of decades that a positive “HIV” test can result from dozens of conditions, some of them diseases, others not — section 3.2.2 in The Case against HIV.

At least, it’s been known to people who are familiar with the peer-reviewed literature. That doesn’t include huge swaths of health-care-associated people and institutions. So when someone tests “HIV-positive”, the ignorant conclusion is almost invariably drawn that the unfortunate “HIV-positive” person has been infected in some way; and if sexual intercourse seems impossible, then it must be through dirty needles — even though peer-reviewed studies have shown that using fresh needles conduces to more prevalence of “HIV-positive”, not less (section 3.3.8 in The Case against HIV).

Innumerable absurdities have damaged innumerable individuals and groups because “HIV-positive” is taken as proof of infection: an 18-month-old baby is infected despite the absence of all possible modes of infection (Immaculate infection by HIV). I’ve noted many other absurdities (159 posts are currently in the “HIV absurdities” category on this blog), for example Spontaneously generated HIV; Youngest person sexually infected with HIV? How are pre-teens infected?; World AIDS Day: Black Stars and “life-saving” HAART; Spontaneous generation of “HIV”.

A striking example has just been reported by the Sydney Morning Herald:
“A four-year-old girl is the latest of more than 200 residents of a remote Cambodian village who have tested positive for HIV, baffling health officials. . . .
more than 200 of the 1700 people . . . have tested positive for HIV since testing began early in December. Residents panicked and rushed to be tested after a 74-year-old man inexplicably tested positive . . . . [and] two women aged 81 and 83 . . . .
all possible causes of HIV transmission were being considered
[but of course none of the many possible causes NOT resulting from “transmission”; after all, some quite common infections like flu, tuberculosis, malaria, can conduce to positive “HIV” tests; so can some vaccinations, very pertinent when “HIV” infection via needles is being alleged]
. . . Cambodian officials have pointed the finger at an unlicensed Cambodian doctor who has admitted re-using needles and syringes on patients. . . .
Cambodian authorities have charged the unlicensed doctor Yem Chhrin, 55, who had practised in the commune for 21 years, with committing murder with a ‘cruel act’. He faces a sentence of life imprisonment if convicted.”

Cambodia, and especially Yem Chhrin, badly need a branch of Clark Baker’s Office of Medical and Scientific Justice.

Posted in HIV absurdities, HIV in children, HIV risk groups, HIV skepticism, HIV tests, HIV transmission, Legal aspects | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

Joseph Newton again?!

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2014/10/27

In 2009, quite a few posts on this blog featured vigilante anti-denialist Dr. Seth Kalichman, social psychologist at the University of Connecticut, who had researched HIV/AIDS dissidence by attempting to disguise himself as graduate student “Joseph Newton”, corresponding with several RA members and even attending a Duesberg conference on aneuploidy and cancer.

In recent weeks, some correspondence among RA members has focused on the fuss over Ebola. A search for the first studies of Ebola virus led to some 1977 articles in The Lancet, in issues not available to me direct on-line or in print. Our excellent Interlibrary Loan service delivered them to me very promptly, copied in the Storage Facility holding overflow material from the university’s main library.

To my astonishment, at the head of the text of the copied articles there appeared in large font the name Joseph Newton!

Could Kalichman/Newton have hacked into my university account? Had he been keeping tabs on me all these years?

That paranoid thought had at least some slight basis in sort-of evidence: During the e-mail exchanges in 2009, Kalichman had at one time sent (as Kalichman, not as Newton) some information intended for essentially all of his correspondents, and had — surely by mistake — included among the addressees not only me but also a psychologist in this university’s Psych Department; which explained for me how Kalichman/Newton had gleaned such inside information as that I had been a quite well-regarded Dean. Could Kalichman have used that contact to find ways to infiltrate my university accounts??

At any rate, I needed to find out how on earth “Joseph Newton” had appeared as the header on those Ebola articles. So I sent a query to Interlibrary Loan Services.

The reply was reassuring: There is a man named Joseph Newton working in our Storage Facility.

Some people might regard this as an astonishingly improbable coincidence. But I’ve had the benefit of personal instruction by more than one distinguished probabilist and have long understood that there’s nothing at all objectively remarkable about such coincidences, no matter how subjectively striking they may seem; see pp. 59-63 and 213-4 in Science or Pseudoscience: Magnetic Healing, Psychic Phenomena, and Other Heterodoxies (University of Illinois Press, 2001).

“Newton” is not so common a name, but it isn’t all that uncommon either. My eccentric interest of longest standing is Nessie, the Loch Ness “Monster”, one of the iconic cryptids studied by cryptozoology; and one of the compendia of cryptozoology is authored by a Michael Newton — Encyclopedia of Cryptozoology: A Global Guide to Hidden Animals and Their Pursuers.
What’s more, that book was published by McFarland, who also published my last two books.
More “coincidence”.

Posted in HIV absurdities | Tagged: , , | 7 Comments »

OFFICIAL: NOTHING is KNOWN about HIV/AIDS

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2014/07/27

The mainstream literature reveals quite clearly that essentially nothing is known or understood about “HIV” or about “AIDS”; but to appreciate these revelations one must be prepared sometimes to read more or less between the lines.

A fine opportunity for that was provided by the recent 20th International AIDS Conference. The lack of knowledge is not admitted overtly but it clearly underlies what the HIV/AIDS protagonists regard as grist for further research funding. For example, When will there be a cure?
“‘We have plenty of data telling us we can make progress,’ said Françoise Barré-Sinoussi . . . . But she’s not foolish enough to give a timetable. She recalled predictions in the mid-1980s that a vaccine would be relatively simple to design. As of now, of course, there is still no vaccine even close to clinical availability.”

30 years of promises, announced breakthroughs later retracted, and other “progress” haven’t gotten anywhere.

What needs to be known?
“Which cells are targets? How do they work? Are there antibodies that can be manipulated? How? What cells can harbor latent HIV? Can they be located and destroyed?”

“[W]e don’t know how to eradicate the virus. We don’t know all its hiding places. And we don’t have good tools to measure it even in the hiding places we know about.”

And of course the central question remains, how on Earth “HIV” is supposed to destroy the immune system. No credible mechanism has been discovered during these 30+ years (section 1.3 in The Case against HIV).

One doesn’t know whether to laugh or to cry in recalling Robert Gallo’s assertion a couple of decades ago: “We probably know more about how HIV produces its pathology than
about the pathological mechanism of virtually any other microbe” (p. 296 in Virus Hunting: AIDS, Cancer, and the Human Retrovirus: A Story of Scientific Discovery, 1991).

As to the Mississippi baby that had been thought to have been cured by massive antiretroviral treatment starting at birth, a couple of years later she was found to be still (or again!?) “infected”. More conundrums:
Ø The child had no detectable immune response to HIV before the rebound. What was keeping the virus at bay?
Ø Sensitive tests could find no latent virus. Where was HIV hiding?
Ø What triggered the rebound?

Dissidents, of course, DO understand what’s going on. There’s no such thing as “HIV infection”. “HIV+” is a very non-specific biomarker for a number of conditions, chiefly those associated with weakened immune systems involving CD4 cells; but not only those: for example, pregnancy is a “risk factor” for testing “HIV+” (section 3.2.2.5 in The Case against HIV).

HIV/AIDS theory rests on the ignorant mistake that is so prevalent, notably in medical “research”: confusing an association with a causal relationship. “AIDS” victims often tested “HIV+” because some or many of the conditions umbrella’d under “AIDS” are associated with weakened immune systems and the propensity to test “HIV+”.

By construing positive tests as signs of infection, mainstream researchers are chasing phantoms, inevitably turning up conundrums and mysteries and enigmas, endlessly chasing red herrings and wild geese. Browse the rich crop of absurdities generated in this way.

Nothing about HIV/AIDS theory makes sense or fits the evidence, but the mainstream continues its insane pursuits: insane because they keep repeating the same blunder-based activities and expecting that somehow there will be a different result, that understanding instead of conundrums will somehow pop up.

 

Posted in experts, HIV absurdities, HIV does not cause AIDS, HIV skepticism, HIV tests, uncritical media, vaccines | Tagged: | 15 Comments »

Manslaughter by PreEposure Prophylaxis

Posted by Henry Bauer on 2014/07/13

The HIV/AIDS Establishment — Big Pharma, NIAID, etc. etc. — is assiduously promulgating the idea that healthy individuals who engage in sex should imbibe highly toxic substances so that they will be less likely to become “HIV-positive”.

This illustrates how true believers and those with vested interests are able to bias clinical trials to deliver desired results even when much earlier data already established that the desired results cannot have been obtained honestly:  for example, several trials of tenofovir to prevent “HIV infection” managed to report that serious adverse events from tenofovir were no more common than from placebo, even as it has long been established that tenofovir causes kidney failure and other harm.

Since this illustrates general flaws in medicine and science, I posted the full analysis on my scimedskeptic blog rather than here; see When prophecy fails.

Posted in antiretroviral drugs, clinical trials, experts, HIV absurdities, HIV risk groups, HIV transmission, sexual transmission, uncritical media | Tagged: , , , | 5 Comments »