CHAPTER 12

CHAPTER 12
Rethinking AIDS
The AIDS Theory under Scrutiny
t was in 1980 when the first AIDS cases were diagnosed, but despite the most colossal efforts by
scientists and policy makers, AIDS has remained a mystery disease. Commonly believed to be
caused by HIV – Human Immune Deficiency Virus –scientists still haven’t found an antidote for the
disease. There is no convincing medical knowledge as to how the pathogen HIV is supposed to cause
AIDS. The current AIDS theory also falls short in predicting the kind of AIDS disease an infected person
may be manifesting, and there is no accurate system to determine how long it will take for the disease to
develop. The HIV/AIDS theory contains no information that can truly help identify those who are at risk
of developing AIDS.
With regard to “treating” AIDS, until recently, patients were able to choose between a small number of
drugs that were originally developed as cancer chemotherapies, but had to bear with extreme side effects,
such as loss of hair, anemia, muscle deterioration, nausea, and other immune suppressing effects. A newly
introduced cocktail of three drugs (protease inhibitors), which are less toxic than the originally used drugs,
seemed promising at first in being able to suppress HIV. Yet the cumulative failure rate of the new drugs
has now reached 50 percent and continues to increase as strains of HIV develop resistance to them.
Already between 20 and 30 percent of patients are now infected with viruses resistant to protease
inhibitors, and the situation is worsening day by day. Although the drugs have given many AIDS patients
a “new lease of life” (not necessarily because the drugs suppress HIV, but because they also subdue most
other disease-causing agents, at least for a while), the initial euphoria about the new AIDS treatment has
died down and so has the hope of finding a cure, at least within the medical field.
The fact that there is no reliable latency period – the length of time from being infected with HIV and
developing AIDS symptoms – makes it virtually impossible to predict the beginning of the disease. The
first AIDS victims were told that they could expect to die within one year after infection, but today the
grace period ranges from 12 to15 years, which makes immediate treatment after HIV infection dubious.
I
323
This is certainly not the last revision. The majority of HIV infected people continue to be AIDS-free and
only a fraction of them develop AIDS symptoms such as pneumonia, cancer of the blood, or dementia.
To add more confusion to the situation, health officials are unable to predict how many people will be
afflicted with AIDS in the future, as only a small percentage of the one million HIV-infected Americans
will get the disease. In the first 20 years or so of the epidemic, 95% of the AIDS cases were among the
major health risk groups – highly active homosexuals, heroin addicts, or, in a few cases, hemophiliacs, and
since then more and more heterosexual men and women are found to test HIV positive.
According to official estimates, two thirds of infected persons supposedly are in Africa, where the
epidemic exploded during the 1990s, and one fifth are in Asia, where the epidemic has been growing
rapidly in recent years. As of the end of 2003, an estimated 34.6 million to 42.3 million people throughout
the world were living with HIV infection, and more than 20 million had died of AIDS. In that year alone,
about 4.8 million people became infected with HIV, and about 2.9 million died of AIDS. However, as we
shall see, these estimates are significantly flawed and manipulated.
Just four years earlier in 1999, the statistics showed figures that in no way support today’s figures.
With the officially proclaimed mortality rate of 50-100 percent among HIV infected people, we should
have had many more deaths in Africa where the number of infected at that time was estimated to be as
large as six to eight million, and also in Haiti, where over six percent of the population tested HIV-positive.
Yet during the nineties, the African continent had only 250,000 AIDS cases, and Haiti had almost none.
This leads to the simple, but most important and almost forsaken question regarding AIDS, which is “what
causes it?”
So far, there is no scientific evidence that AIDS is a contagious disease, although it seems to be that
way to most people. What is known from recently published research is that HIV only extremely rarely
spreads heterosexually and can, therefore, not be responsible for an epidemic that involves millions of
AIDS victims around the world. There is also no proof to show that HIV causes AIDS. on the other hand,
it is an established fact that the retrovirus HIV, which is composed of human gene fragments, is incapable
of destroying human cells – yet cell destruction is the main characteristic of every AIDS disease. Even the
principal discoverer of HIV, Luc Montagnier, no longer believes that HIV is solely responsible for causing
AIDS. In fact, he showed that HIV alone cannot cause AIDS. There is also increasing evidence that AIDS
may be a toxicity syndrome or metabolic disorder that is caused by immunity risk factors, including heroin,
sex drugs, antibiotics, commonly prescribed AIDS drugs, rectal intercourse, starvation, malnutrition and
dehydration. Dozens of prominent scientists working at the forefront of the AIDS research are now openly
questioning the virus hypothesis of AIDS.
HIV – A Harmless Passenger Virus?
If a germ or virus has infected a person, the disease-causing microbe is present in high concentrations
within the patient’s body. In the case of AIDS, there should be very large amounts of virus material in the
affected tissues. Small amounts would not be sufficient to cause such extensive destruction, as is found in
the body of an AIDS victim. Therefore, active virus material should be profusely present in the white cells
of the immune system, particularly in the T-helper cells, as well as in lesions of Kaposi’s sarcoma and in
the brain neurons of those afflicted with dementia. Yet this is not the case at all. The HIV retrovirus cannot
be found in any of the diseased tissues of AIDS patients. This fact alone should make anyone suspicious
about the claim that HIV leads to the destruction of organs and system.
324
If HIV were capable of infecting T-cells or other parts of the immune system, then, as is the case with
every other type of viral infections, the cell-free virus particles or virions would easily be detected in the
blood stream. However, in the majority of AIDS patients, there are no viruses found anywhere, and in the
remaining few there are not even enough present in the blood to cause as much as a simple cold. This
makes AIDS patients de facto HIV-negative. The 20 million deaths attributed to AIDS were in actual fact
not caused by HIV, but other reasons.
Like other viruses, HIV becomes quickly inactivated by rapid antibody production of the host’s
immune system. When it first infects the body, HIV can achieve high levels of virus and for a brief period
cause mild flu-like symptoms, if any at all. The immune system then quickly neutralizes the retrovirus and
puts it into a dormant state. Since AIDS patients who test HIV positive have been infected many years
before they die, their HIV retrovirus remains inactive.
An HIV test can only detect either the dormant, inactive virus or antibodies that the immune system
produces to remain immune to the virus in the future. Therefore, the HIV-test itself proves the
harmlessness of HIV. Although it is rarely mentioned in the medical literature, HIV has never been found
in the lymph nodes, macrophage cells, dendritic cells, and elsewhere in the body of an AIDS victim; there
has never been even a sign of a hidden virus infection. If the HIV were responsible for destroying the
human immune system, it would have to be present where the destruction takes place. But this is not the
case.
Flawed HIV Tests – The True Cause of the AIDS Epidemic
When Judith was diagnosed HIV positive she was told that there are a number of AIDS drugs that she
could take to ward off the disease, at least for some time. But when she learned how sick these drugs
could make her, she decided not to take them. About 18 months after the initial diagnosis, Judith showed
no signs of being ill, and so her doctor recommended a retest. Since the new test came back negative, she
did a second one, which turned out to be indeterminate. And to further confuse an already very confusing
situation, the thirst test she took turned out to be positive for HIV. Unable to figure out from the tests
what was really going on, Judith began to investigate the medical literature and learned that HIV tests are
highly inaccurate and even the HIV hypothesis was anything but correct.
Since testing positive, Judith gave birth to two children (now ages two and six) who, like herself, are
the picture of health with no indications of a serious illness. She never had them tested for HIV. The
whole family eats natural, organic foods and enjoys a completely normal life. Judith and her kids are not
alone. There are thousands of healthy HIV-positive people who don't take AIDS drugs, and who show no
sign of sickness. But only a few people escape the wrath of an unreliable testing procedure.
HIV can only be detected in the human body after the immune system has already killed the virus
through its arsenal of antibodies. The presence of HIV antibodies proves that the virus has been rendered
harmless, with no further role to play. This should make the HIV-testing procedure a method for informing
infected people that the virus has been successfully destroyed, rather than delivering them a death
sentence.
The most frequently used HIV test used today is ELISA and, in theory, it seems to be accurate. A
sample of the patient’s blood is added to a mixture of HIV proteins. If the blood contains HIV antibodies,
they react to the proteins. This is supposed to be proof that the patient has been infected with HIV.
Another test called WESTERN BLOT is often used as a confirmation. Besides being unable to detect
actual virus in the blood of a patient, these tests are so unreliable that they are not only useless, but also the
325
cause of unprecedented trauma and suffering in the world. In Russia, in 1990, after 20,000 “patients” had
tested positive with the ELISA test, only 112 were confirmed using the Western Blot. The French
government has recently withdrawn nine HIV tests because they were far too unreliable. If the true
positive rates of these HIV tests, instead of their extreme failure rates, were applied to the alleged 40
million HIV infected population in the world, we would have a mere total of 224,719 people infected
with HIV. Nobody could possibly call this a mass epidemic, especially since most HIV-infected people
not undergoing drug treatments live normal, healthy lives like Judith and her children.
The above figure may, in fact, even be much lower. The only reason people are added to the everincreasing
list of HIV victims is because more and more people are tested for HIV. The most commonly
used HIV tests are antibody tests, which means that they can cross-react with normal proteins in human
blood. Both the ELISA and WESTERN BLOT tests react to proteins that are shared by all other
retroviruses found to live in the human body. P24 is one of them. Considering the large number of
retroviruses existing in the body, if a patient has produced antibodies to p24, which is generally accepted
as proof for the presence of HIV, the chances that he is actually infected with HIV are very slim. In actual
fact, there are nearly 70 commonly occurring conditions – all listed in the medical literature – that are
known to make the tests come up positive. These include yeast infections, simple head or chest colds,
influenza, rheumatoid arthritis, hepatitis, herpes, recent inoculations, drug use and pregnancy. There are
literally hundreds of millions of people in the world who have either gone through such conditions or are
currently experiencing them. Giving them an AIDS test would automatically sentence them to a disease
they may not have. And that is exactly what we are doing during the humanitarian AIDS campaigns
promoted by the WHO and numerous charitable AIDS organizations.
Another class of HIV tests, called viral load tests, can produce dozens of conflicting results – even from
the same blood sample. The general population is made to believe that an HIV test is a reliable method to
determine whether they are infected with HIV or not. If they were to read the disclaimers on the HIV test
kits they would perhaps become a little suspicious, at least enough to insist on further evidence, if such can
ever be provided. This is what the disclaimers say: “At present there is no recognized standard for
establishing the presence or absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood,” or “The AMPLICOR
HIV-1 MONITOR [Viral Load] test is not intended to be used as a screening test for HIV or as a
diagnostic test to confirm the presence of HIV infection,” or “Do not use this kit as the sole basis of
diagnosis of HIV-1 infection” (Abbott Laboratories HIV Test, Roche Viral Load Test and Epitope, Inc.
Western Blot Test, respectively). And to top this fiasco, positive test results can occur due to “prior
pregnancy, blood transfusions...and other potential nonspecific reactions” (Vironostika HIV Test,
2003).
If the screening tests for HIV are in fact not to be used for diagnostic purposes, what are they then used
for, you may ask? Why are hundreds of millions of people in Africa and Asia subjected to AIDS tests if
they shouldn’t be used to confirm the presence of HIV infection? How many “potential nonspecific
reactions” could there be to influence the outcome of an HIV test? And why is the WHO proclaiming that
there are nearly 40 million people infected with HIV when this worldwide organization knows so well that
the tests used cannot be used to make such claims?
The AIDS tests are used to create statistics of an epidemic that has no scientific backing, but is blindly
accepted as true by innocent people who have no reason to believe they are being deceived over something
like a deadly disease. This information needs to be shared with every person who tests positive for HIV,
yet it is being concealed from these “patients.” Unless they do their own research, which cannot be
expected by the vast majority of Africans, Asians and South Americans, these frightened, confused and
326
unsuspecting people are misled to believe they are infected with a deadly virus. Most AIDS workers do
not even know the scientific facts, or lack thereof, behind the HIV theory and these testing procedures.
In one study, 41 percent of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) showed presence of antibodies to p24
in their blood. This didn’t mean, however, that they were infected with HIV, although the ELISA test
would have implied exactly that. As the co-discoverer of HIV and leading virologist Dr Robert Gallo has
repeatedly pointed out, P24 is not unique to HIV. If the ELISA test is applied to people who have been or
are infected with the viruses that cause malaria, hepatitis B and C, tuberculosis, glandular fever, papilloma
virus warts, syphilis, leprosy, and many other conditions, the chances they are declared AIDS victims are
extremely high. In Africa and other developing countries, the HIV test is usually given to people who feel
unwell or are already diagnosed with one of these diseases. Given the large number of people affected by
them, meaning, hundreds of millions, the number of possible false-positive results could well exceed 100
million, given the ever-expanding testing campaigns.
Take the striking example of worldwide malaria. In 1999, the World Health Organization (WHO)
estimated that over 300 million clinical cases of malaria occur annually from among the 2.3 billion people
(almost one-third of the world's population) who are at risk of infection with the malaria parasite.
Accordingly, by 2004 over one billion people would have contracted malaria, all of whom will have
developed antibodies for the harmless retrovirus p24 in their blood. Out of the 300 million annual malaria
victims, an estimated 1.1 million people die from the disease. If you tested all the 300 million annually
occurring malaria victims, you would automatically have about 299 million new cases of HIV. And most
of the million who died from malaria would automatically be categorized as being AIDS victims because
the ELISA test shows positive for p24.
While these numbers are shocking, they are probably underestimates of the world's malaria burden,
given that only a fraction of malaria cases are reported each year and that deaths among children with
chronic malaria are often attributed to other illnesses. These statistics may vary by a factor of three,
depending on the method of estimation. In Africa alone, the 28 million reported cases of malaria are
believed to represent only 5-10% of the total malaria incidence on the continent (Hamoudi & Sachs, 1999).
Dr. Max Essex, a highly respected and leading AIDS expert from the Harvard University School of
Public Health, found that some 85 percent of Africans who tested HIV positive with the Western Blot test
later tested negative.
Another source of false-positive results from HIV tests is the large variety of antibodies which people
produce after undergoing blood transfusions, or when exposed to foreign semen and virus material during
homosexual activity, and after taking drugs. Drug users and homosexuals are known to make many more
antibodies than the average person does. The chances that they become victims of a false positive AIDS
test are, therefore, more likely than not.
What all this basically means is that there is no reliable way of telling how many people are infected
with the HIV virus. Nor can anything be said about how many of the so-called AIDS diseases, if any at all,
are in fact HIV-related.
Nobel laureate Kary Mullis, who invented the first HIV test, has openly questioned the validity of the
“AIDS virus.” According to Mullis, his highly sensitive detection technique known as PCR can only be
used to find dormant, inactive HIV, incapable of harming anyone. Mullis says: “I can’t find a single
virologist who will give me references which show that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS…” PCR
proves that AIDS cannot be caused by a virus! This also means that the autoimmune deficiency
syndrome (AIDS) can very well occur without the presence of virus.
327
HIV Cannot Cause as Much as the Flu
Contrary to the original HIV-AIDS hypothesis, which says there is a 50-100 percent probability of
death from infection, there are only a few HIV infected people who actually die, at least not more than in
any other category of disease. When blood from AIDS patients was injected into chimpanzees in 1983, all
of them tested HIV positive but when tested 10 years later, none of them had developed any signs of
sickness. In another experiment, over 150 chimpanzees received injections of purified (highly
concentrated) HIV in 1984, but developed no symptoms of disease to this very day. However, what the
experiments did show was that their immune systems had produced antibodies against the virus within a
month, just as it happens in humans. The presence of antibodies ensures that immunity against the
microbes has been secured on a permanent basis. Just as animals cannot get AIDS from HIV, so can
human beings not get AIDS from HIV either.
Among other human viruses, such as those causing polio, flu, hepatitis, etc., HIV may be one of the
most harmless ones; it is quickly and easily neutralized by our immune system. The incubation period for
every known virus does not exceed more than a maximum of 6 weeks, as is the case with the human
hepatitis virus. It is a well-established biological law that any germ that does not cause symptoms before it
is cleared by the immune system cannot be considered to be a cause of disease. No virus is capable of
surviving 10-15 years in a normal healthy body with an active immune system. And even if it were
possible in theory that a few virus particles would survive a decade or longer, they still would have to
overcome the immune system, and they would certainly not be enough in number to impair the person’s
immunity (unless of course the immune system is destroyed by other causes).
The AIDS theory suggests that HIV destroys the immune system’s T4 cells, thereby leaving the body
susceptible to all kinds of infections and diseases. It had already been discovered in the mid-eighties that
the number of HIV infected T4 cells is far too small to cause widespread destruction and that the human
body is perfectly capable of replacing T4 cells faster than HIV could destroy them.
Since the beginning of AIDS as we know it, many thousands of people, including medical workers and
hemophiliacs, were accidentally infected with HIV, but only a few of them developed AIDS - in fact, not
more than any other group in society. Among the health workers who developed AIDS, 90 percent
belonged to the major risk group of AIDS cases – highly active homosexuals and intravenous drug users.
Among hemophiliacs, who are “naturally” immune-deficient, there are just as many HIV-negatives dying
as there are HIV-positives dying. In other words, whether a hemophiliac is infected or not, his chances of
developing an AIDS-type disease are exactly the same. Until now there has not been even one human or
animal that has developed AIDS after being infected only with HIV. This fact may be reason enough to
reconsider the role of HIV as being the sole agent responsible for causing dozens of different kinds of
(AIDS) diseases. Luc Montagnier, co-discoverer of the HIV virus, has already pointed out that, without
another co-factor, HIV cannot cause AIDS.
HIV Behaves like Every Other Virus
Man lived with the HIV virus long before it was discovered and before large numbers of people
underwent AIDS tests. The same applies to other types of viruses. For example, the herpes virus is present
in 2 out of 3 Americans; another two thirds carry the herpes class cytomegalovirus. Four out of five
Americans walk around with the Eppstein-Barr virus, which in few of them causes mononucleosis or
“kissing disease.” Even more people are host to the papilloma virus, which is known to cause warts. There
328
is hardly anyone living on this planet who does not carry at least a dozen or so viruses in his body, each
one related to a specific infectious disease. Yet no scientist in the world would use these facts to announce
a mass outbreak of viral epidemics. Every experienced virologist knows that all these viruses are dormant,
i.e., have been neutralized by the immune system. He also knows that this makes the infected people
immune against re-infection, unless of course the immune system is damaged or suppressed through other
factors.
If HIV, herpes, and all the other types of viruses that are latent in humans and animals living on the
planet were capable of killing people, there would hardly be anyone left to treat the billions of sufferers.
HIV, being a human retrovirus (produced by the body itself), is totally benign to its host cells and is,
therefore, incapable of destroying any cell it has infected. This applies especially to the cells of the
immune system, which are equipped with highly sophisticated defense mechanisms. For HIV to have any
destructive value, it would literally have to flood the body with active viral particles. Yet HIV can barely
be detected even in late stage AIDS patients, despite using the most sensitive of tests. The traces of HIV
virus found in some AIDS patients is inactive, which means, it is harmless, and therefore not responsible
for the destruction of the body. If HIV were the cause of AIDS, it would have to do this during the two
phases of HIV infection where blood levels of HIV are significant:
1. Soon after infection when the immune system produces antibodies.
2. At the very end stage of AIDS when the levels of all viral activity increase because the immune
system has collapsed (due other reasons than HIV infection).
There is enough scientific data to show that HIV, being and remaining inactive even in AIDS patients,
does not kill T-cells and, therefore, cannot cause AIDS!
Research under Scrutiny
There are numerous research studies which all seem to show that only HIV-infected persons can
develop AIDS (in comparison with those who are not infected with the virus). This is but a correlation, not
a cause and effect relation. Although there is no proof of it, this idea has become the most powerful and
persuasive argument to convince both scientists and the general population to believe that HIV causes
AIDS. And yet by analyzing any of these studies you will find that the HIV-infected groups consisted only
of members who were in the AIDS risk category, e.g., very active homosexuals, heroin addicts and
patients with a history of major diseases. By contrast, the non-infected control groups consisted of healthy
heterosexuals. In other words, AIDS seems to develop only in people whose immune system is already
impaired due to other causes than HIV.
Official statistics from the 1990s revealed that 90 percent of all AIDS victims were men and 95 percent
of all AIDS victims living in wealthy nations belonged to one or more of the above risk categories. But
there exists no such distinction in the above studies. The only common factor between the two groups is
age. Yet it is very obvious that a 25-year old immune deficient heroin addict is more likely to suffer an
immune disease than a 25-year old healthy medical student, regardless of whether he has one or several
inactive viruses in his body or not. That an increasing number of heterosexuals are now testing positive for
HIV has less to do with a new trend, but with the expansion of the tests to that group. How many
heterosexual Americans have virus-induced warts you may ask? Millions of them! And how many have
had undergone blood transfusions or contracted once in their life a virus that causes malaria, hepatitis B
and C, tuberculosis, glandular fever, syphilis, and many other conditions? Again, millions of them! All of
these millions of people, if tested for HIV, are likely to test positive because they will have developed
329
antibodies for the harmless retrovirus p24 in their blood. As we shall see, sexual intercourse between
heterosexuals is not the reason for spreading HIV.
In the last 15 years, several scientists have proposed conducting a case-controlled study that would
compare a large number of HIV-infected people with a similar number of uninfected people, all of whom
would share the same health risks or medical history. Yet there hasn’t been much interest in conducting
such a study as the main focus is still on destroying a virus rather than on eliminating immune suppressive
influences.
HIV + Pneumonia = AIDS?
In the meantime, more and more studies are being published to show that AIDS, which cannot be
classified as a disease because every case displays a different combination of symptoms, occurs only in
people who test HIV-positive. Before HIV was discovered, pneumonia, dementia, herpes-infections,
weight loss, tuberculosis, Kaposi’s sarcoma, chronic diarrhea, several lymphomas, yeast infection, and
other opportunistic infections were considered separate diseases. Depending on whether a patient had
already a deficient immune system or belonged to a certain health risk group, the symptoms of these
diseases exactly matched those which are now considered AIDS diseases.
Before the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, a patient who died from pneumonia, tuberculosis, or a lymphoma
died from the respective causes of these diseases. By contrast, a patient who dies from pneumonia today
and happens to have antibodies to HIV or P24 in his blood, is automatically labeled and listed as an AIDS
victim. People with a low T-cell count in their blood are considered immune deficient, but if they continue
having the same condition after testing positive for HIV, they are routinely “sentenced” to AIDS, with or
without clinical symptoms.
There are already over 35 such diseases now that have been renamed “AIDS” in this way. one of the
latest ones is cervical cancer, which has become the first AIDS disease that can only affect the female
gender. This may give the false impression that AIDS is now penetrating the heterosexual community as
well. The inclusion of cervical cancer as an AIDS disease has “increased” the number of AIDS victims
among women quite dramatically, yet at the same time it has “decreased” the number of ordinary cervical
cancers among women. Overall, the mortality rate of these diseases has not changed at all. The claim that
more and more heterosexuals are now afflicted with AIDS is not based on real science, but ignorance or
denial of the true facts.
The renaming of old diseases as AIDS further supports the hypothesis that the AIDS syndrome is never
found in anyone without presence of HIV. By definition, there is no AIDS without HIV, regardless how
many non-HIV people may die from the very same symptoms. Accordingly, anything that even remotely
resembles immune deficiency plus HIV now counts as an AIDS disease, despite the fact that AIDS
patients with Kaposi’s sarcoma have been reported to have normal immune systems. It has been argued
that wherever there is HIV, AIDS will be the consequence. However, this argument is heavily flawed.
AIDS-like indigenous diseases existed long before the testing of antibodies for HIV was introduced. What
is different today is that the old diseases are renamed and “become” AIDS diseases whenever HIV is
found to be present as well. In real terms, though, there are not any more AIDS cases with HIV in the
world than there are without HIV.
330
Grave Statistical Errors
In the United States alone, the estimated number of one million HIV-infected people has remained
constant since the HIV test was made available in 1985. Given the fact that HIV tests produce far more
false positives than correct positives, there may actually be very few HIV infected Americans. Of these,
regardless of whether they are true positives or not, less than 1/3 had been diagnosed with AIDS by the
year 1993 and 121,000 of them were still alive. Over two thirds of the HIV infected Americans have not
developed any AIDS symptoms since 1985, and the already huge gap is widening each year. The number
of new AIDS cases has actually been leveling off for several years and has dropped dramatically in 1996
despite the fact that the new yearly AIDS cases are always added to the totals of all AIDS victims so far.
During the same period, although the new AIDS treatments were only made available in 1996, the number
of AIDS deaths across the United States has dropped considerably, with a decrease of 44 percent during
the first half of 1997. A similar trend occurred in Western Europe, also before new treatments were
introduced. The new treatments had absolutely nothing to do with the reduction, although the extensive
advertising campaigns by the drug companies may want to make the masses believe they did.
A contrived AIDS explosion took place at midnight, January 1, 1993. on New Year’s Eve 1992, the
Los Angeles Times reported: “As many as 40,000 Americans who are HIV-positive will wake up on New
Year’s Day with a diagnosis of AIDS.” As forecast, the number of new AIDS cases climbed by 204
percent within the first three months of 1993 compared to the same period of the previous year. This
intended statistical error and similar ones occurred because much milder forms of diseases had been
included in the official list of AIDS diseases.
The same manipulation of data has also influenced world AIDS figures. More and more indigenous
types of disease occurring in developing countries are being added to the AIDS defined disease groups,
thus giving the false impression that there is an AIDS explosion in the Third World. Statistics released by
the WHO show that in 1995 AIDS soared by 25 percent, reaching a total of 1.3 million. This figure, of
course tripled ten years later, again due to intentional statistical error, false HIV tests, and the renaming of
existing diseases as AIDS diseases.
In those areas of the world where there are more HIV infected people than in America, the actual
number of AIDS cases is significantly less. For example, only 250,000 of the six to eight million Africans
who were reportedly infected with HIV between 1985-1995 had contracted AIDS or whatever one may
want to call the diseases formerly known as tuberculosis, glandular fever, diarrhea and slim disease (unlike
our wasting syndrome). All of these old diseases have since been renamed AIDS diseases, and of course
this catapulted AIDS into a mass epidemic in the developing world. Given the large number of people
dying from tuberculosis alone (millions each year), and the high failure rate of AIDS tests in Africa (85
percent or more), it may well be that the number of real AIDS victims, if any, does not exceed 50,000.
Zaire alone, with its three million supposed HIV-infected people, has only a few hundred AIDS cases,
or less than 0.02%. No scientific study would remotely consider AIDS to be caused by HIV when the
number is this minute. Her neighboring country Uganda, with its one million HIV-infected people, had
only generated 8,000 AIDS cases. Out of the 360,000 HIV-infected Haitians, only a few hundred have
AIDS. The Haitian AIDS patients, most of them undernourished, suffer from toxoplasmosis, which has
always been a common cause of death. These figures may still be very conservative, as the old HIV tests,
which were far less accurate and produced even more false positives than the extremely unreliable ELISA
and WESTERN BLOT tests, were applied to millions of people worldwide.
Developing countries may have such low AIDS rates because they do not have such extraordinary
health risks as the ones found among very active homosexuals, intravenous drug addicts, and hemophiliacs.
331
Those who have long histories of various opportunistic infections or used “poppers” regularly in the past,
or had anal sex, received blood transfusions and took poisonous addictive drugs, belong to the risk group
for AIDS, with or without HIV. Because all these factors severely damage the immune system, the
individuals being in this risk group are the most likely candidates to “acquire” the Human Immune
Deficiency Syndrome.
The health risks specific for each group are responsible for the particular types of diseases. Heroin
addicts are the most likely to develop tuberculosis, herpes infection and weight loss, and hemophiliacs
produce pneumonia, regardless whether they have HIV or not. This fact makes HIV a harmless passenger
virus. There are as many cases of pneumonia and tuberculosis today without HIV as there are with HIV.
Kaposi’s sarcoma also is no longer an exclusive “AIDS disease.” Slim disease is as common among
Africans who test positive for HIV as it is for their HIV-negative counterparts. The lack of HIV test
equipment in most parts of Africa compels doctors to diagnose prospective AIDS patients merely by
symptoms, a very unreliable and unscientific practice. Yet the numbers of these cases are added to the
overall “statistical evidence” that AIDS is still continuing to spread.
The soaring AIDS epidemic is a product of mass deception based on faulty science, unreliable AIDS
tests, and a greedy pharmaceutical industry that does everything in its power to have unrestricted access to
the mostly untapped profit potential of Third World populations. Developing countries thus far have
largely refused to rely on modern medicine to keep their people healthy. AIDS has profoundly scared them,
and so they have given into the tremendous pressure exerted onto them by international organizations,
such as the WHO and their generous sponsors – the drug giants. In the historic past, the developing world
has been exploited by the wealthy nations. Today, this exploitation is concealed in the generous offer to
help the AIDS-afflicted countries control the escalating crisis, a crisis that existed long before HIV was
named a deadly virus.
HIV is not a New Virus
Most of the manipulated statistical evidence of an escalating AIDS epidemic occurred because of faulty
testing procedures and the wrong assumption that HIV is a new virus. Everyone who tests HIV positive is
believed to have acquired the virus from someone else. The HIV testing procedure reveals nothing about
how long the virus has been in a person’s body. So, in the assumption that HIV must be a new virus
(because nobody has discovered it or tested for it before 1983), we have never even considered the
possibility that HIV, like so many other human retroviruses, could have been around for decades or even
centuries. If HIV is indeed an old virus – and there is ample evidence now to support this claim – we
should be able to find its traces (antibodies for HIV) in large numbers of people, especially in developing
countries.
HIV turns out to be a virus that has existed long before 1980. In 1998, research conducted at the Aaron
Diamond AIDS Research Center at Rockefeller University, USA proved through blood tests gathered in
Africa between 1959 and 1982 that the HIV virus already existed in 1959. Based on this and other related
research it is now estimated that the virus first got into people some time in the 1940s or early 1950s.
Since the HIV test was introduced to the Western Hemisphere in 1985, the number of HIV-infections
has remained constant world-wide until the mid 1990s. But once the screening campaigns of HIV were
extended to new countries in Africa, and in more recent years also in Asia, the number of infected people
“rose dramatically.” There is no information available on how long these people carried the HIV virus or
even whether they had received it from their parents.
332
According to a previous version (1990) of the HIV/AIDS theory, HIV infected people would
automatically contract AIDS within several years and subsequently die. This, however, is not and has
never been correct, although it may apply to a small number of HIV infected persons whose immune
system has been destroyed through major health risks that are listed below. Since major health risks exist
almost everywhere in the world, a “rise” in the number of HIV infected people in areas where no one had
been tested before is more than likely, especially since HIV has been around since the 1940s. In its “New
World Health Report 1996”, the World Health Organization (WHO) states that “there are now more than
21 million people infected with HIV.” Eight years and 100 million ELISA tests later, the number has
nearly doubled. The WHO reports omit the fact that this “rise” in numbers stems mostly from the
extension of this extremely inaccurate HIV-test to previously uncovered populations in the world. In
actuality, HIV stopped spreading long ago. Besides, as the scientist who discovered HIV admitted, HIV
cannot cause AIDS.
New Evidence: HIV Rarely Spreads Heterosexually
In the developing world, the virus has existed for at least 65 years because HIV is rarely spread
heterosexually. Research that studied the wives of infected hemophiliacs showed that an HIV-positive
person requires over 1,000 unprotected sexual contacts with an HIV-negative person from the opposite sex
to pass along the virus just once. In another surprise study, published in the Lancet, 1997, 349:851-2,
French doctors at the Cochin-Port Royal hospital in Paris looked at the risk of married couples wanting to
conceive a baby where the man was HIV-positive. Their findings are in line with infection rates of 1 per
1000 acts of unprotected sex among stable heterosexual couples. According to this published research, it
would take an HIV-infected heterosexual who has sexual intercourse 2-3 times a week about seven years
to infect another person with HIV! This practically means that it would take the HIV-infected males of 1
million couples 2,739 years of daily unprotected sex to infect all female partners. In the developing world,
unprotected sex among heterosexuals can, therefore, not be held responsible for the high number of people
who test HIV positive (even if HIV tests were 100% reliable, which they are not).
However, the situation is different with regard to infected pregnant women. A baby is directly and
constantly exposed to the mother’s blood for a period of 9 months. During this period the virus has a 50%
chance of being passed on to the baby. Retroviruses survive when they reach a new host prenatally
(passed from mother to child). This way of passing on a virus is at least 500 times more efficient than
through sexual transmission. (Blood transfusion is another obvious way of contracting the virus.)
In contrast to the situation in wealthy nations, HIV in Third World countries is equally distributed
among both sexes, which means it must have been passed on from mother to child for many centuries. Had
HIV been a deadly killer virus, the babies of infected mothers would have obviously been born deformed,
miscarried, or dead because newly born babies have not yet developed adequate immunity to defend
themselves against a killer virus. Even if they somehow managed to survive, they could only last for a
maximum of two years – the latency period given to infected babies before developing AIDS. The
spreading of the virus would have stopped automatically through the destruction of all new babies that
were infected by their mothers.
Due to the low rates of homosexuality in developing countries, the prenatal route of transmission has
been their only efficient way (50 percent chance) to pass on HIV to the new generations. Grown female
children who become mothers would again have a 50 percent chance of passing the virus to their children.
Therefore, in Africa alone, HIV must have been around for many generations before it was able to infect
333
as many as 6-8 million people. The latest argument that the increased condom use in some African nations
helped to slow the rate of infection is hardly convincing since the main route of HIV infection in Africa is
from mother to child.
Who Gets AIDS?
The situation is much different in the industrialized world where HIV is mostly transmitted through
different routes. The most susceptible groups are very active homosexuals, needle sharing heroin addicts,
and hemophiliacs who receive transfusions. They represent the main and easiest routes through which
disease-causing microbes can be passed on to others who share one common risk factor: immune
deficiency. In other words, the groups in society where HIV is commonly present amongst their members
are also the groups with the biggest health risks and, therefore, more likely to produce AIDS symptoms.
Still, HIV’s most concentrated occurrence among health risk groups cannot be blamed for causing AIDS
diseases, just as elevated cholesterol levels cannot be held responsible for causing heart disease. These are
mere correlations. Another problem is that gay men, drug users, and hemophiliacs who are exposed to
semen, drugs, blood transfusions, hepatitis, the Epstein Barr virus, and many other diseases or factors
known to cause biological false positives in HIV tests, represent the most unreliable groups in society to
demonstrate real presence of HIV.
As prophesied 13 years ago, AIDS has invaded the heterosexual community, or so it appears. Since
cervical cancer and other female diseases have more recently been renamed AIDS diseases, AIDS seems
to have affected the female population. However, most AIDS patients are still male. Anything and
everything that strongly abuses the body and depletes the immune system must be held responsible for
causing illness, regardless of whether it is a stroke, cancer, or an AIDS disease. Emotional stress,
insufficient nutrition, dehydration, sleep deprivation, alcohol, cigarettes, antibiotics, hard drugs, excessive
sexual activity, etc., can all damage the immune system. A dormant piece of viral material such as HIV, on
the other hand, can do no harm in a healthy body.
Whoever continuously exposes himself to immune risk factors is also more susceptible to developing
the Acquired Human Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Someone may argue: “What about an innocent baby
who becomes infected with HIV by its parents and dies from pneumonia? Is that not AIDS?” The fact is
that at least as many children die from pneumonia with or without HIV, and it doesn’t significantly
influence the outcome of the disease whether they had a previous encounter with HIV or not. What can
make a big difference, however, is how the pneumonia is treated.
What Really Causes AIDS
Over 35 diseases have now been renamed AIDS diseases, all supposedly caused by one single (inactive)
virus. What has been considered normal pneumonia until 10-15 years ago, if linked with HIV, it is now an
AIDS disease. The same applies to Candida infection, tuberculosis, Kaposi’s sarcoma, and cervical cancer.
If an African suffers from “slim disease” and has HIV antibodies in his blood, he is being told that he has
AIDS. If he dies from the disease, he obviously must have died from AIDS. This simple logic may sound
persuasive to a lay person.
On the other hand, if an African is diagnosed with having “slim disease” without previous HIV
infection and subsequently dies, AIDS is not considered the cause of death. It is worthy to note that there
334
are at least as many cases of slim disease without HIV as there are with HIV, and that the retrovirus HIV
has proven to be incapable of causing cell destruction, which is the main characteristic accompanying
“slim disease”.
If the HIV virus cannot be held responsible for causing AIDS diseases, then what is the cause of AIDS?
1. Narcotic Drugs
Roughly ten years before the discovery of AIDS, the industrial world experienced a dramatic increase
in the use of non-prescribed drugs ranging from hashish, marijuana and psychedelics to LSD, MDA, PCP,
heroin, cocaine, amyl and butyl nitrites, amphetamines, barbiturates, ethyl chloride, opium, mushrooms
and other “tailor-made” drugs. By 1974, five million Americans had used the drug cocaine, and only
eleven years later, the figure had jumped to over 22 million. In 1990, the American Drug Enforcement
Administration had confiscated 100,000 kilograms of cocaine, compared to a mere 500 kilograms in 1980.
Within a decade, the number of cocaine overdose victims had increased from 3,000 in 1981 to 80,000 in
1990, an increase of 2,400 percent. Amphetamine use also jumped dramatically. In 1989, the Drug
Enforcement Administration seized 97 million doses, up from 2 million doses in 1981. Also, aphrodisiacs
became extremely popular during the 1970s. By 1980, five million Americans had become regular users of
amyl nitrites, or “poppers.”
The AIDS epidemic followed a huge jump in drug abuse. Every practicing physician who has seen the
severe destruction of body and mind in drug-using patients understand that drugs are capable of doing
even more harm to a person than just killing them. Drugs are known for their powerful effect of
systematically destroying a person’s vital functions, including the immune system. The figures given
above can in no way represent the total use of drugs within the population, but they certainly indicate that
drug abuse could be playing a major role, if not the biggest role in causing AIDS diseases. Most narcotic
drug users have p24 in their blood. An HIV test is likely going to turn them into HIV positive patients that
“need” treatment with expensive and potentially devastating AIDS drugs.
Until recently, drug use was most concentrated among young men aged 25-44, and so, AIDS also was
most common among this age group. Nine out of every ten AIDS cases were male and 90 percent of all
people arrested for possession of hard drugs were male, too. Seventy five percent of these were aged 25-44
and 72 percent of all AIDS cases among men occurred within exactly the same age group. Could this have
been pure coincidence?
Between 1983 and 1987, the death rate among young men of this age group increased by an average of
10,000 per year and so did the number of AIDS deaths within the same period. During the 1980s, deaths
from drug overdoses doubled in men of this age group, while deaths from blood poisoning – an indirect
result of the injection of drugs into the blood – quadrupled. The same happened to the AIDS sufferers of
the same age group during the same period of time.
Now, more females are involved in heavy drug use. Three quarters of all heterosexual AIDS cases and
two thirds of all female AIDS cases are injection drug users. Two thirds of all babies born with AIDS have
mothers who inject drugs. These figures do not include the use of drugs taken orally or in an inhaled form.
The major percentage of AIDS cases, however, is still found among the highly active homosexual men
aged 25-44. This group not only abuses large quantities of narcotic drugs, but also antibiotics, antifungals,
and antivirals, such as AZT, ddI, ddC, d4T, acyclovir, and gancyclovir, to name a few. A large number of
American studies confirmed that over 95 percent of male homosexual AIDS patients typically admitted to
popper inhalation and regular use of hard drugs.
335
AIDS patients suffer from pre-existing immune damage, which in many cases is caused by years of
drug abuse. Without an already damaged immune system, AIDS diseases are extremely unlikely to
develop. If any of the above risk groups take an AIDS test they are highly likely to test positive, due to the
large number of antibodies their bodies have produced to counteract diseases caused by drugs, semen,
blood, and viruses, etc.
Why Babies Have AIDS
Babies are strongly affected by the drug abuse of their mothers. Two thirds of all babies with AIDS
symptoms, regardless whether they test HIV-positive or not, have mothers who inject drugs; some large
percentage of the rest have mothers who use non-injected drugs. Heroin is one of the most commonly
injected drugs. Persistent drug users show symptoms of loss of white blood cells, the main upholder of
immunity, as well as lymph node swelling, fever, rapid weight loss, brain dysfunction and dementia, and a
marked susceptibility to infections. Heroin addicts often die from pneumonia, tuberculosis, and other
opportunistic infections, as well as from wasting syndromes. In all these diseases, the protein p24,
generally accepted to be proof of the existence of HIV, is amply present. Although p24 is not unique to
HIV but shared with most infectious diseases, they have nevertheless been classified as AIDS diseases.
What is very sad is that babies are defenseless against drug poisoning. Recent research has shown that
pregnant women who smoke cigarettes pass cancer-forming chemicals to their babies. It is difficult to
imagine what must be taking place in the developing brain of an embryo when it is exposed to heroin
injected directly into his mother’s blood, which is also his blood.
Many babies born to cocaine-using mothers are born with severe mental retardation and are vulnerable
to tuberculosis and lung diseases. The major experimental drugs are so poisonous that regular use can
result in dementia, serious bacterial infections, and total destruction of the immune system. The drugs
certainly possess a much higher probability of impairing immune functions so typical to AIDS than a
simple, inactive virus.
2. Antibiotics
Most of the patients suffering from AIDS also have a long history of taking antibiotics. Antibiotics
may be a major co-factor in developing AIDS among the very active homosexual men who depend on
them in order to ward off the many venereal diseases and parasites arising from non-hygienic sexual
practices. Many gays have received open prescriptions for antibiotics from their doctors who advised them
to swallow the drugs before their sexual encounters. Some of them had been on such toxic drugs as
Tetracycline for as many as 18 years before their immune system succumbed to the devastating side
effects they produce. This particular drug causes extreme sensitivity against sunlight. If exposed to
sunlight, it can burn one’s skin beyond repair. Those affected often suffer from Seasonal Affective
Disorder (SAD), a form of depression that arises from lack of exposure to sunlight. The drug is also
known to disrupt the body’s basic metabolic functions, which may result in virtually any type of disease. It
also works as a strong immune suppressant; and, perhaps, one of its worst side effects is the destruction of
beneficial bacteria in the gut. Eradication of these bacteria makes room for yeast and other infectioncausing
bacteria, spreading throughout the body and causing continuous flare-ups of disease symptoms
Other commonly used drugs include flagyl and diiodohydroxquin. Both are used to combat amoebacaused
diarrhea. The drugs can produce severe forms of hallucination and depression.
336
Corticosteroids, sulfa drugs, and septra are prescribed for various other conditions, all with serious side
effects. They cause severe digestive disturbances, and if worsened by a nutritient-deficient diet so common
among active homosexuals, they systematically destroy their bodies’ defenses against disease-causing
bacteria, viruses and parasites. And so the formerly strong and healthy young men increasingly suffer from
opportunistic infections which speed up aging indicators similar to those found only in old and fragile
people.
3. Blood Transfusion
All the above mentioned risk factors cause 94 percent of all AIDS cases in the United States, a typical
representative for other industrialized nations. But the remaining 6 percent do not seem to fall into any of
the risk categories. Over half of this small percentage “contracted” AIDS through blood transfusions,
which to the general population would appear to be a definite indication for HIV to be the cause of AIDS.
However, a closer analysis of the AIDS survival statistics reveals that over half of all blood transfusion
recipients die within the first year after transfusion. Exactly the same applies to patients who are not HIVinfected.
The risk groups for failing blood transfusions are found among the very young and the very old,
and those who are severely injured.
Under normal circumstances, healthy people never get a blood transfusion. They are given only to
people who have already suffered from long-standing illnesses or after traumatic medical intervention,
such as surgery. Anesthesia alone acts as an immune- suppressant, and the same applies to antibiotics
administered after surgery to ward off infectious microbes. If a patient undergoes an organ transplant, he
will receive steroids and other drugs that prevent his immune system from rejecting the new organ. Many
organ recipients have to take these drugs for the rest of their lives, but since these drugs suppress overall
immunity, they often die from “unrelated” problems within a very short time. The treating doctors rarely
attribute these deaths, though, to the side effects of the drugs, and tell the deceased’s relatives that they
tried everything they could to save their loved ones. If these same problems, however, occur in HIVpositive
patients, the cause of death is considered to be AIDS. And accordingly, the victims become part
of the “statistical evidence” that AIDS can be transmitted through blood transfusion.
In the United States, out of the 20,000 hemophiliacs, who rely on regular blood transfusions, few are
diagnosed with AIDS despite the fact that over three-quarters were infected with HIV through blood
supply. Mortality rates for hemophiliacs, in fact, have never been as low as they are today.
It has been proven that blood transfusions can bring up false-positive HIV test results. In a study
published in the Lancet, patients showed the presence of large quantities of HIV antibodies in their blood
immediately after blood transfusion, decreasing thereafter. one healthy volunteer who received six
consecutive blood injections at four-day intervals tested HIV-negative after the first injection, but with
each subsequent transfusion the HIV-positive antibody response increased. The argument that HIV can be
transmitted through blood transfusions may, therefore, only be partially true, if it is true at all. As the
above experiment shows, blood transfusions can actually produce human retrovirus material that may be
identical or similar to HIV. This certainly doesn’t mean that an AIDS disease will automatically develop
as a result of blood transfusion (most hemophiliacs don’t develop AIDS). But if the immune system is
already severely damaged or low due to other factors, such as drug abuse or surgery, blood transfusions
can greatly increase the risk of developing a life-threatening immune deficiency disease or AIDS (see also
“Business with Our Blood” in the following chapter). If blood transfusions can lead to the body producing
337
antibodies against the HIV human retrovirus, as research has shown to be possible, it is misleading to
claim HIV-contaminated blood is solely responsible for HIV infection in blood recipients.
4. AIDS – A Metabolic Disorder, not an Infectious Disease
For several years it has been known that AIDS sufferers develop a drastic imbalance of very important
amino acids before they actually deteriorate. A balanced protein metabolism is the main prerequisite for a
healthy immune system. If the concentration of some of the amino acids in the body is too high or too low
the immune system can no longer fight acute infections. This is particularly true for AIDS diseases.
The physiological imbalances related to basic protein metabolism in AIDS patients can be caused by
any of the above factors, which all have highly stressful effects on the body. To combat such severe stress,
the body triggers stress hormones, such as cortisone, designed to break down muscle proteins into basic
amino acids needed for emergency reuse. This effectively means that the body is feeding off itself. If the
stress persists, the amino acid balance can no longer be maintained, which eventually causes the collapse
of the immune system so typically found in the AIDS disease.
During the process of destroying its own cells to obtain essential amino acids, the body has to deal with
a large amount of cell debris, including the fragments from destroyed cell nucleus. It seems that some of
these DNA or RNA fragments are labeled as the retrovirus HIV. Since there are various types of such
fragments, there are also several types of HIV, i.e., HIV1, HIV2, etc. as well. This may explain why there
are so many people now who are HIV-positive, but never were infected by HIV-contaminated blood or
were in contact with HIV-infected people. Research by Dr. Hulda Clark, Canada, showed that babies can
test HIV-positive, despite the fact that their parents are HIV-negative.
HIV is much more common than most people think. Many people who go through periods of extreme
stress may have a strong presence of HIV in their blood for which their immune systems produce
antibodies. Since they are unlikely to test for AIDS, they may never find out that they have encountered
this virus. Even if they underwent a reliable AIDS test, they may not test positive for HIV1. However, if
the test also searched for presence of antibodies for HIV3 or another of its variations, these individuals
may now turn out to be HIV positive. For many years, the testing facilities in most countries could detect
only one of the many HIV types. Today, a person’s blood may be screened for two types of HIV, which is
still not enough to determine whether he is HIV positive or not (considering the high false-positive rates of
HIV tests).
Unless the individual’s stress reaction continues, he may lead a perfectly healthy life. But if stresscaused
cellular destruction becomes a long-term issue, the amino acid balance becomes increasingly
disturbed. This in turn may drain the immune system to such an extent that it can no longer defend the
body against even the low level infection-causing agents that permanently linger in everyone’s body.
When the host’s immune system fails to neutralize the germs, a simple bacterium can cause a lifethreatening
infection, as seen among many AIDS patients.
Drug addicts, very active homosexuals, babies born to mothers with an unbalanced amino acid pool,
people who are in need of a blood transfusion or had one, and those who are undernourished, starving, or
are otherwise traumatized, all are suffering from an unbalanced amino acid pool and are, therefore,
possible candidates for HIV particle generation. Intense stress responses cause the breakdown of cell
nucleus, which results in an increased presence of DNA or RNA fragments. The first and natural response
by the body is to produce antibodies to these fragments. As mentioned before, Multiple Sclerosis, malaria,
hepatitis B and C, tuberculosis, glandular fever, papilloma virus warts, and many other ailments can cause
338
the body to make antibodies for the retrovirus p24. If immunity becomes subdued through any major
illness or constant stress, a flood of disease-causing agents begin to invade the body. Wherever the body is
most vulnerable and exposed is where the AIDS disease is likely to strike first.
Narcotic Drugs and Rectal Intercourse Can Cause AIDS
Use of intravenous morphine and heroin alters the basic metabolism of the body. The body’s own
natural morphine compounds, called endorphins, are not only capable of reducing pain and producing
euphoria, but they also suppress hunger sensation. People who use heroin or morphine tend to lose their
appetite and subsequently stop eating and taking enough fluids. The body, while detecting a famine and
dehydration, begins the cortisone release mechanisms to try to survive the food and water shortage. When
this mechanism reaches a certain level, it will cause an imbalance of the amino acid pool in the blood and
lead to an increased breakdown of cell nucleus. The DNA assembly line (double-stranded helix) collapses
into its segments of proteins which the body, in turn, uses to restore the amino acid balance to whatever
extent possible. These fragments are what tests reveal to be HIV particles. HIV results from a strong
imbalance of essential amino acids in the body, which in this case is caused by drug abuse.
This understanding of HIV matches the basic characteristic of HIV being a human retrovirus, and due
to its natural design, is not able to kill or harm cells. HIV by itself has no capability of entering a living
cell and breaking up the DNA or RNA assembly line, but the body’s own cortisone can if stress is severe
and prolonged enough.
Intravenous drug users who share HIV contaminated needles may test HIV-positive as a result of
exposure to the foreign DNA fragments (HIV), but if they die from an AIDS disease it is because of an
imbalance in their own amino acid pool. The continued depletion of certain amino acids such as cystine,
cysteine, or tryptophan leads to a suspension of antibody production and, eventually, to a total collapse of
the immune system. This is AIDS. All intravenous dug users are at risk of eventually producing HIV
particles and developing AIDS diseases.
The same applies to people who have regular rectal intercourse, not because they can infect each other
with HIV, but because this unnatural form of sexual practice causes constantly occurring intestinal injury,
thus depleting the body’s amino acid reserves. As a result of the constant internal injuries, a massive
number of cells have to be dismembered, cleared, and replaced continually, which produces a long-term
depletion of the body’s protein reserves. When one or more amino acids become depleted, DNA or RNA
molecules break apart, leaving behind their protein fragments labeled HIV. Therefore HIV is the effect of
immune deficiency and not its cause.
The cells of AIDS patients are consistently short of the amino acid cysteine and its precursor cystine,
which may result from one or several of the causes mentioned before. Laboratory research has
demonstrated that when amino acid depleted cells are given back the missing amino acids, these cells stop
producing HIV particles because their DNA and RNA molecules are able to sustain their assembly line.
In addition, regular discharge of human semen into the rectum, which has no natural defense lines
against the immune-repressive properties of the semen that bathes the sperm, eventually leads to a
shutdown of normal repair work and cell replacement. This causes chronic toxicity, which also acts as a
constant blow to an already weakened immune system.
339
Malnutrition, Dehydration, and Starvation Can Also Cause AIDS
As in drug-caused malnutrition, lack of proper nourishment activates the body’s stress responses to the
point that it starts feeding on itself. This is necessary to keep the amino acid pool balanced. But when too
many muscle cells are broken down to release the missing amino acids, large amounts of DNA or RNA
fragments are generated which the body tries to neutralize by producing antibodies. The same stress
response occurs in cellular dehydration. A severely dehydrated person would, therefore, test HIV-positive.
In the developing world, particularly in Africa, malnutrition, dehydration and starvation have existed
for centuries. During a famine, people naturally start feeding on their own bodies. The byproduct of this
survival attempt of the body is HIV material, consisting of DNA or RNA fragments. Consequently, the
immune system produces antibodies to render these viral particles harmless. Although many of the people
in Africa have received inactive HIV from their parents, who at some stage in their lives have gone
through a famine, others have produced it themselves from their bodies’ natural response to malnutrition.
Wherever the AIDS test is introduced in developing countries, large numbers of the population test
HIV positive either because of false-positive HIV tests or because they or their parents once had to endure
a famine. The HIV of the latter group is mainly the result of malnutrition or related illnesses, which is
clearly demonstrated in the case of the 360,000 HIV-infected and undernourished Haitians. By contrast,
the HIV of developed countries results mostly from the above mentioned causes. Although HIV and
AIDS are two completely separate issues, they can occur in combination with one another:
1. In developed countries where homosexual intercourse, intravenous drug abuse, and blood
transfusions are very common.
2. In Third World countries where wasting disorders such as “slims disease,” tuberculosis, and malaria
exist in epidemic proportions.
5. AIDS Drugs Cause AIDS
Christie’s story is a sad one. Her two foster-care children, Daniel and Martha, have tested HIV positive.
Their birth mother, Christie’s niece who is a long-term drug user, was unable to raise the children, so
Christie offered to take care of them. Daniel had twice been sent to a Children's Center for HIV-positive
children, once soon after he was born, and when he was four years old, and again recently. Her other child
had also been taken to the center several months ago and has been kept there since. Christie was accused
of being a negligent parent because she refused to give her children the prescribed AIDS drugs.
These children have had a clean bill of health and never showed any sign of illness. But when city
health agencies found out the kids weren’t on the drugs, they removed them from their guardian and sent
them to an AIDS clinic for mandatory treatment, and after that, to the Children’s Center. Each day they
are forced to take a cocktail of powerful, debilitating and potentially fatal AIDS drugs, such as AZT,
Nevirapine, Epivir, Zerit, and others. Many of the children there are unable to tolerate so many
medications, and so they are drugged through a tube in their stomachs. If a child refuses drugs too many
times, they take them away for an operation to feed the drugs directly into the stomach.
And what is the purpose of drugging those healthy HIV positive kids? AIDS research is going to
generate the biggest profits from drug sales in the world. There is a whole list of drug studies on children
either still running or recently concluded. The research is sponsored by government agencies such as
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development, and huge pharmaceutical companies such as Glaxo, Pfizer, Squibb and Genentech.
One of the studies, “The Effect of Anti-HIV Treatment on Body Characteristics of HIV-Infected
340
Children” seeks to identify the causes of “Wasting and Lipodystrophy [fat redistribution]” by using drugs
known to cause wasting and lipodystrophy. Another study looks at “The Safety and Effectiveness of
Treating Advanced AIDS Patients between the Ages of 4 and 22 with Seven Drugs, Some at Higher than
Usual Doses.” Although the seven drugs in the study are all known to cause some of the most severe side
effects seen by any drug on the market, they are administered at “higher than usual doses” in four-yearolds.
A third study using the drug Stavudine by itself, or in combination with Didanosine.” The combined
drug cocktail has killed pregnant women.
Then there is the vaccine study involving children of ages 2 months to 8 years. The children are being
administered “live chicken pox virus,” despite the fact that live virus vaccine can actually cause chicken
pox.
Another study measures “HIV Levels in Cerebrospinal Fluid.” To obtain cerebrospinal fluid, it has to
be gathered from a spinal tap, a dangerous and invasive procedure. And although this may be hard to
believe, there is a study on HIV-negative children who were born to HIV-infected mothers that uses an
experimental HIV vaccine. The parents or guardians of these legally kidnapped children are rarely ever
informed that their kids are subjects or rather, guinea pigs, in these clinical trials. The law prevents them
from trying to save their children from the holocaust of human experimentation. The National Institute of
Health (NIH) is legally permitted to use HIV-positive children of impoverished, drug-addicted mothers
unable to care for them as test subjects. So far, dozens of trials with AZT and Nevirapine were conducted
through the late 90s. And there are 227 studies ongoing or currently completed. The studies are sponsored
by NIH subdivisions; many are cosponsored by the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the drugs
being tested. The studies use the standard AIDS drugs: nucleoside analogues, protease inhibitors and
Nevirapine. Side effects described on the warning labels of these drugs include:
? Interfering with normal cell division
? Cancer
? Heart Disease
? Preventing formation of new blood
? Bone marrow destruction
? Anemia
? Death in pregnant mothers
? Spontaneous abortion
? Birth defects
? Severe liver damage and liver failure
? Pancreatic failure
? Muscle wasting
? Developmental damage
? Death in children and adults
? Cancer
? Interference with the body's ability to build new proteins
? Bizarre, grotesque and often fatal physical appearance
? Wasting in the face, arms and legs
? Fatty humps on the back and shoulders
? Distended belly
? Organ failure due to drug toxicity
341
? Steven-Johnsons Syndrome – a grotesque, violent skin disorder
Despite the fact that these poisonous drugs destroy the human immune system (=AIDS) and have not
shown to have any curative effect, they are nevertheless prescribed routinely now. The producers of AIDS
drugs protect themselves against liability suits by placing the following notice on the drug labels:
“This drug will not cure your HIV infection. Patients receiving antiretroviral therapy may
continue to experience opportunistic infections and other complications of HIV disease. Patients
should be advised that the long-term effects are unknown at this time.”
They only reason people take these drugs is because they test positive for HIV. Their only (often fatal)
mistake is that they don’t read or understand the HIV test kit labels and the drug labels. This is especially
sad when children are involved.
The Administration for Children's Services (ACS) came down hard on Christie for
not drugging her son Daniel. They forced Daniel to go on the “miracle drug” Nevirapine and within six
months, he was on life support due to organ failure. When they put her healthy daughter Martha on a
cocktail of AIDS drugs, it completely destroyed her immune system, making her susceptible to constant
disease flare-ups she otherwise would never have experienced. The main question is why are doctors
permitted and even encouraged to treat AIDS patients with drugs that kill their immune systems?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to help them build their immunity? These questions will need to be raised
again and again if we want to tackle disease in general and AIDS-type illnesses specifically.
Summary: HIV, which consists of human DNA or RNA fragments, cannot be considered to be the
cause of AIDS. AIDS, which is an umbrella name for a number of different illnesses that all share a
disrupted metabolism and immune system, is caused by one or several major risk factors. If a healthy
person acquires HIV through an external source, i.e., through contact with HIV-infected blood or through
the mother, it is rendered harmless and inactive by the host’s immune system. Such a person would have
produced antibodies for HIV in his blood just as he would for any other previously encountered viral
particles. He is in no greater danger of developing an AIDS disease than any other person without HIV
does, as can be seen, for example, in the vast majority of HIV-infected Africans or Asians.
The occurrence of DNA or RNA fragments (HIV) in the blood of a person who actually produces
abnormal cell destruction, on the other hand, indicates the presence of a serious immune deficiency.
Malnutrition, starvation, dehydration, recurring injuries, or cell suffocation from internal congestion
results in an imbalance of the body’s amino acid pool. To correct such an imbalance the body begins to
break down its own cell nuclei in order to obtain the missing amino acids. If there is a shortage of even
one amino acid in the body, the percentage composition of all the other amino acids also becomes
unbalanced. This can have a simultaneous catastrophic effect on the cells and their nucleus throughout the
body. The destruction of cell nucleus results in DNA or RNA fragments; the fragments consist of human
proteins called retrovirus. HIV is one the many retroviruses that can be generated in this way. Thus, HIV,
which is generated within the body through destruction of cell nucleus, cannot be considered to be the
cause of AIDS; it is an unavoidable byproduct of the body’s fight for survival. This fight may eventually
lead to the destruction of the immune system which is called AIDS.
342
AIDS – A Process of Awakening
Mankind is rapidly awakening to a new level of understanding that will discriminate between false and
correct information. We are living in a time where scandals can no longer be concealed from the public
eye. Whatever may be the truth about any subject, it will eventually dominate in collective consciousness.
People will simply know from within themselves what is right and what is wrong. The AIDS phenomenon
is one of today’s great challenges that can urge someone to search for the solutions to his problems within.
Andrew, who was my first AIDS patient, made this realization almost instantly.
When I met Andrew 5 years ago, he was a young homosexual with fully developed AIDS symptoms.
He was emotionally unbalanced, depressed and extremely sensitive. He lived in Athens, where, in his
opinion, nightlife was the only thing “worth living for.” First, I motivated him to become a “day person”
again. The Ayurvedic routine, cleansing procedures, improved nutrition, daily meditation, etc., soon
improved the multiple lesions on his skin, steadily increased his T-cell counts, and what he felt was most
remarkable, improved his appetite and digestion. With all that, his joy of living returned, but the new kind
of joy was quite different to what he had ever before experienced. It was the joy of waking up, of
appreciating the sun, nature, and day life, rather than clubs, drugs, and nightlife.
When I met Andrew a few years later, he was completely free of all signs of AIDS. He was used to the
idea that he was still HIV positive, and with the understanding I was able to provide him with about this
virus, it wasn’t even important anymore whether he had antibodies against it or not. What he knew was
that he had overcome AIDS, which was most essential for his self-esteem and happiness. The stigma of
HIV was no longer a matter of disgrace to him. Andrew had changed from being a victim of a disease (that
didn’t exist) to a person worthy of love, appreciation and recognition. This is what AIDS can do. It can
awaken a person to living his life with greater love, dignity, and purpose.