Tag Archives: AIDS

Just Returned from the Bacterial, Viral and Infectious Diseases Conference in Dubai, UAE

Der. Stef Stienstra of the Dutch Armed Forces of the Netherlands Presenting a Certificate to Dr. Robert O. Young
Der. Stef Stienstra of the Dutch Armed Forces of the Netherlands Presenting a Certificate to Dr. Robert O. Young

Back from Infectious Diseases Conference in Dubai, UAE

Dr. Robert O Young and Dr. Galina Migalko just returned from a successful Conference in Dubai, UAE at the Annual Conference of Bacterial, Viral and Infectious Disease. The following is a few pictures from the Conference Program, the references for our newly published peer reviewed scientific articles in The Journal of Infectious Diseases and Therapy, December 2018, Volume 6, ISSN: 2332-0877 and Dr. Young and Dr. Migalko being presented with their certificates by Dr. Stef Stienstra of the Dutch Armed Forces, Netherlands. To learn more go to Dr. Young’s website at: drrobertyoung.com or universalmedicalimaging.com

A Second Thought About Viruses, Vaccines and the HIV, HPV, HEP C, Measles, Mumps, SARS, Hantavirus and Ebola Hypothesis

Micrograph of a solidification of metabolic acid
Parasite or Virus?
So-called Ebola Virus or Parasite?
A Second Thought About Viruses, Vaccines and the HIV/AIDS, HEP C, HPV, Polio, Spanish Flu, Hantavirus, SARS, Measles, Mumps,  and Ebola Hypothesis! – Part 1
“In the sciences, people quickly come to regard as their own personal property that which they have learned and had passed on to them at the Universities and Academies.  If, however, someone else now comes along with new ideas to contradict the credo (that has been recited for years and passed on in turn to others) and in fact, even threaten to overturn it, and all passions are raised against this threat and no methods are left untried to suppress it.  People resist it in every way possible: pretending not to have heard about it; speaking disparagingly of it, as if it were not even worth the effort of looking into the matter.  And so a new truth can have a long wait before finally been excepted.”  – Goethe
The first isolation of the virus was achieved in 1892 by Russian that bacteria hunter Dmitri Ivowski, who gathered fluid from disease , tobacco plants.  He passed this liquid through field for fine enough to retain bacteria; yet to Ivowski’s surprise, the bacteria space free filtrate easily made healthy plants sick.  In 1888, a Dutch botanist, Martinus Wilhelm Beijerinck, repeating the experiment, also recognized that there was an invisible cause and named the infectious agent,  “Tobacco mosaic virus.”  In the same year as Beijerinck’s report, two German scientists, purified a liquid containing ‘filterable viruses’ that caused foot and mouth disease in cattle (viruses were at one time called ‘filterable bacteria’, but eventually the term ‘filterable bacteria’ came to apply only to viruses, and was the words ‘filterable bacteria’ were dropped).  Walter Reed followed in 1901 with a filtrate responsible for yellow fever, and soon dozens of other disease causing viruses were found.
In 1935 , another American, Wendell M. Stanley, went back to the beginning and created pure crystals of tobacco mosaic virus from a filtered liquid solution.  He affirmed that these crystals could easily infect plants, and concluded that a virus was not a living organism, since it could be crystallize like salt and yet still remain infectious.  Subsequently, bacteriologists all over the world began filtering for viruses, and a new era of biology was born – Virology.
Historically, medical science has a baseline on the question of whether any virus is alive.  Originally, it was described as non-living, but is currently said to be an extremely complex molecule or extremely simple microorganism, and is usually referred to as a parasite having a cycle of life.  (The term “Killed” is applied to certain viral vaccines, thus implying an official conviction that viruses are alive.)  Commonly composed of either DNA or RNA cores with protein coverings, and having no inherent reproductive ability, viruses depend upon the host for replication.  They must utilize the nucleic acids of living cells.  They infect to reproduce their proteins (i.e., trick the host into producing them), which are then assembled into new viruses like cars on assembly line.  Theoretically, this is their only means of surviving, and infecting new cells or hosts.
Birth of Virology — a Miscarriage?
Underlying the birth of virology was the doctrine of monomorphism — that all microorganisms (herein called microforms) are fixed species, unchangeable; that each pathological type produces (usually), only one specific disease; that microforms never arise endogenously, i.e., have absolute origin within the host; and that blood and tissues are sterile under healthy conditions.  This last point warrants immediate comment.  Theoretically, under ideal health conditions, the blood might be sterile, though it has the inherent potential to develop morbid microforms, as discussed in my book, Sick and Tired.  Long and repeated observation of live blood in the phase contrast, darkfield microscope, however, shows that the blood can contain various microforms and otherwise asymptomatic host, or in a condition defined as normal or healthy in orthodox terms.  The forms are easily visible before other physical symptoms arise. (Since long and repeated observation has correlated their presence with other disease symptoms and their disappearance with the return of health, they serve as indicators of impending outward signs of disease).
Monomorphism was the cornerstone of developments in 20th-century medical research and treatments.  Refusal by the mainstream to examine fairly, much less except, the demonstrated fact of pleomorphism — that viruses and bacteria (and also yeast, fungi and mold) are evolutions from a small indestructible anatomical element, I referred to as the microzyma.  That microforms can rapidly change their form (evolve and “devolve”) in vivo, one becoming another dependant upon conditions in the inner terrain (environment); that blood and tissues are not necessarily sterile; and that there are no specific diseases, but only specific disease conditions — was the foundation of a latter-day “Galileo debate.”  It is so-called because those who wore the “robes” of scientific authority just like today, reprising the religious fanatics who punished the noted astronomer for his truth, would not be swayed from folly when presented with its contrary theory.  These truths began in earnest with Antoine Bechamp in the 19th-century (who also endured the indignation of a fanatical clergy).
In the early third of the 20th-century, the heated debate took place over ‘filterable bacteria’ versus ‘non-filterable’ bacteria.  This was a major battle concerning micromorphology (discussed briefly below). The orthodox view prevailed: bacterial forms were not small enough to pass, or did not have a smaller, earlier stage.  What passed through ‘bacteria proof’ filters was something else, i.e., viruses.  Standard medical textbooks, long made this filtering distinction between bacteria and viruses.  Subsequently, however, the cellular nature of many filterable forms originally thought to be viruses, such as some mycoplasmas, rickettsias, and various other groups, has been established.  In this writer’s opinion, with the victory of the monomorphic view, deeper understanding of infectious ‘disease’ was lost, setting the stage for cancer, degenerative symptoms, HIV. AIDS, Ebola, Hantavirus, Hep C, HPV, etc.
What You See?
A typical bacteria is about 1 micron in size.  Most filterable bacterial forms now called viruses range in size from .3 microns (300 millimicrons) to .01 microns (10 millimicrons) — particularly in the colloidal range  (.1 to .001 micron). Most of the larger viruses are a third to a quarter the size of the average bacteria.  And size is critical because .3 microns is the resolution limit of modern-day light microscopes.  Thus, as viruses were discovered (except for the very large ones, such as mumps), they required an electron microscope to be seen, especially given the the fact that Royal Rife’s microscope technology and career were destroyed by vested interests.  Unfortunately, electron microscopes and the process of chemical staining disorganize or damage all specimens, whereas Rife’s technology allowed life to proceed and thus evolve under its lens. As viruses became visible to advancing technology, the ratification was that the technology revealed, two minds infected with monomorphism, protein structures deemed foreign in the body.
A New Theory
Formulated by Antoine BeChamp in the 19th-century, the microzymian principal is the basis of the new theory about ‘viruses’.  Recently, this principle holds that in all living organisms are biologically indestructible anatomical elements, which BeChamp called microzymas.  They are independently living organized ferments, capable of producing enzymes and capable of evolving into more complex microforms such as bacteria, yeast or mold.  Bechamp’s thesis, is that disease is a condition of ones internal environment (terrain); that disease (and its symptoms) are “born of us and in us.”; and that disease is not produced by an attack of micro entities, but calls forth their endogenous evolution.
My studies and research suggests that the complexes, science calls viruses and retroviruses originate in the cell, as the microzymian as the principal suggests.  However, they are created in response to an alarming acidic situation (condition of disease) for the purpose of genetic repair.  They are repair proteins, evolved from anatomical elements (microzymas), not pathogenic  microorganisms.
It is known that normal cell activity includes genetic repair.  Both enzymes and proteins must be involved.  What is the mechanism?  Viruses are organized around DNA or RNA, not both.  Thus, they are quite probably intended to repair genetic molecules or other structures, and show up with disease symptoms, because the body needs them.  Since viruses require a living cell/host for reproduction, how do we know that the scenario is not set in motion, for a purpose by the cell (i.e., it’s microzymas), rather than being the result of invasion?  Because disease (disturbance of balance in the organism) is so prevalent, especially that which is not yet becoming indicated by common symptoms, repair proteins may be frequently or constantly present.  A toxified cell may easily suffer localized damage to the genome.  Since most observers are not even aware of the microzymian principal, much less understand or even consider it, and since monomorphism stresses invasion, these proteins complexes are regarded as foreign and disease is attributed to them.
Another note of interest is the size of viruses compared to the microzyma.  Viruses are considered to be some of the smallest biological particles and are frequently of colloidal size: e.g., hepatitis A, 27 nanometers (.027 microns); hepatitis B (.042 microns); polio virus (.03 microns); EBV (.042 microns); HIV (.080 to .12 microns); influenza (.08 to .12 microns); mumps (.15 to .30 microns); smallpox (.30 microns); and, according to BeChamp, the microzyma (.0005 microns).
In his book, ‘The Blood and its Third Anatomical Element’, Bechamp states: “the microzyma is at the beginning and at the end of all organization.  It is the fundamental anatomical element whereby the cellules, the tissues, the organs, the whole of the organism are constituted living . . . . in a state of health, the microzymas act harmoniously and our life is, in every meaning of the word, a regular fermentation.  In the condition of disease, the microzymas do not act harmoniously, the fermentation is disturbed, the microzymas have either change their function or are placed in an abnormal situation by some modification of the median.  The virus is either a self-ordered microzymian polymerization, or (less likely), a structure made by microzymas.  It is envelope in protein which is also composed of microzymas, and could well be thought of as an autonomous molecular tool box.
Along with doctors Glen Dettman and Archie Kalokerinos, I wonder, “whether Bechamp’s writing anticipated, in some respects, the discovery of RNA and DNA?”  Could the genetic structure be the construct, thus a tool, of the microzyma?  They quote a personal communication [1974] from a professor Bayev of the former USSR Academy of Sciences, who discusses his work showing the molecular self- restoration from its parts of pure transfer RNA from brewers yeast is possible.
In my own research I have found molecular restoration similar to that described by Bayev.  In my experiment , I used 10-year-old coagulated capillary blood from a woman with cancer.  With one drop of .9% of sodium chloride, the blood was restored to an appearance and level of activity characteristic of freshly drawn sample of blood.  In other words, the anatomical microzymas of the dry blood were restored to activity.  Even the white blood cells became active again.  One might eagerly asked for explanation of the reversal of polymers made during clotting.  It is unclear at this point how this reversal takes place, except to say that what can evolve apparently has the potential to devolve.  It is observable, however.  For example, I have seen, and recorded on video, rod microforms retro-grading without any visible decomposition from 10 microns in length to the vicinity of .1 micron.
This research supports the very important postulates that the cell is not the smallest living biological unit, as promulgated by conventional medical science.  In fact, a smaller biological unit is the imperishable micros I’m a, which is an organized, living been “of a special category without analog,” said BeChamp, who found them ready to become active in chalk deposits at least 11 million years old.
The Pleomorphic Cycle
I suggest a developmental cycle in vivo consisting of three macro stages: [1] a primitive stage comprising the repair proteins complexes; [2] an intermediate, or bacterial, stage including filterable forms such as the cell wall deficient forms described by Lida Mittman, PhD. [in Cell Wall Deficient Forms, Stealth pathogens]; and [3] a culmination stage consisting of yeast and fungal phases, and then mold, the and phase.  The usual course of development would be from microzyma to repair proteins, and then to bacterium, etc.  However, under certain conditions, such as, for example, it is highly likely that the microzymas can skip the primitive stage and become bacteria directly.  Although these transformations are as astounding as that of a larva to a butterfly, what is equally impressive under observation is in the rapidity with which they can take place — in minutes, even seconds, sometimes.  By the same token, when provoked by acidic conditions and the cycle proceeds to yeast, fungus and then mold, it may occur so rapidly that the bacterial stage, if that happens, has no time to be of any significance.
Thus, symptomgenic microforms can originate within the higher organisms without invasion, via a permutation of the endogenous microzymas when the situation calls for such change.  The situation is an imbalance referred to by Bechamp as a “modification of the median.”  Endogenous evolution is evident under the microscope when bacterial, yeast, and fungal forms are seen coming out of the red blood cells, which initially appear normal.
Biological Basis for the Pleomorphic Cycle
There is a common biological basis for the pleomorphic cycle and its increasing complexity of organization: more complex forms evolve inherently upon the death of an organism for the purpose of recycling its anatomical and chemical structures in the carbon cycle.  The process of rapid evolution [which is reversible] is an essential life process, which, beyond the repair stage, is necessary to return a dead organism to the earth.  The second and third stage microforms degenerate the body’s vital substances and tissues via putrefaction [bacteria] and fermentation [yeast and fungus].  Fermentation results in acidic waste products, which further breakdown tissue.  Disease symptoms, then, especially the degenerative type, are NOT produced by viruses, but manifest as chemical decomposition, or attempted recycling via fermentation and acidic toxins, but with ‘host’ survival processes still, operable.  Obviously, certain other factors may play important roles in producing symptoms, such as heavy-metal toxicity, or state of mind, for example.  Some of the body survival methods also produce symptoms commonly called dis-eases.  An example is eczema, and emergency expulsion of acidic toxins via the pores of the skin.
The aforementioned casual [alarming] situation, or modification of the median, is chronic tissue acidification [pH imbalance] and oxygen deprivation in the blood and tissues due to acidic forming foods, adverse lifestyle, emotional stress, and environmental stress.  This is not an oversimplification!  Acidification/hypoxia biochemically signals a dead host to the microzymas, while creating collapsed areas [dead zone’s] of the colloidal system in the intercellular fluid, and it is the primary physiological disease condition at which the symptoms commonly called specific diseases arise.
Thus, we distinguish between this disease condition and its consequent symptoms, which include both the morbidly evolved microzymas and the physiological science commonly thought of as specific diseases.  As they develop, microforms [bacteria, yeast, fungus and mold] are actually scavenging forms of the microzyma, developed when disease in the cell life requires tissue to be broken up.  These upper development forms are the ones easily visible in the blood before physical symptoms arise.  They disappear, [devolve] when the recycling task is complete, once again becoming microzymas of the earth and/or air.
Virus or Toxin/Acid?
Regarding the early period of virus isolation, a question is whether the unseen entities isolated in filtered fluids were accompanied by the waste products [mycotoxins] of fermentation by yeast and/or fungus of cellular elements, such as DNA.  If virus infiltrates are injected into a host to prove virulence, it is almost certain that easily filterable molecular toxins will be introduced as well.  Could Dr. Stanley’s “pure crystals of tobacco mosaic virus” have been crystallized acidic toxins?  If so, they would certainly be highly symptomgenic, as are exotoxins at the intermediate stage of the cycle, for example.  However, it is not proof of anything that you can create illness by poison injection, except proof of that tautological fact.
In my research utilizing darkfield and phase contrast microscopy, it is common to see acid crystallization’s in the blood.  It is normal for the body to use calcium or other mineral salts, and fats as well, to chelate the acidic waste products from the morbid fermentation of body proteins, fats and sugars.  Such crystal deposits are found in cancer tissue as well.  A malignant tumor removed from the breasts of one of my research clients was found to have numerous calcium deposits attached to it.  It is an attempt to render inactive acidic substances that make our inner streams healthy, poison our cells, and coagulated colloidal systems in blood and intercellular fluid.
The term “virus” is the Latin word for poison, and gives us insight into the immediate cause of disease symptoms — poison is: exotoxins and mycotoxins, and a toxin, exotoxins, and toxins from environmental sources, [many of which are primary or secondary mycotoxins.].  Orthodox medicine is well aware that it is bacterial toxins more than the bacteria them self.  [They feed in-house], that caused the symptoms referred to as infectious disease.  Little if any emphasis is placed on this fine, but important distinction.  Always, the germ is emphasized.  There is little too, no awareness [or knowledge that], either, of the same role played by acidic toxins of the culminate microforms of the pleomorphic cycle.  Their action and the body’s response to them are frequently ascribe to viruses, which do not produce toxins because they are the toxin or acid, but are said to wreck havoc by a number of other means.  However, if they participate in symptom at Genesis in a host it is because they are stimulated to evolve into more complex, toxic genetic forms.  Somewhat less likely is the possibility that they cause damage as a result of erroneous construction or function, for one reason or another — missing mineral nutrients leading to alkaline mineral deficiencies, for example.
Misconception Breeds Contempt
In addition to chemical toxicity, however, what is the impact of the fear [emotional toxicity] that the word “virus” brings to mind and heart?  It has been said that fear it is the most deadly of disease conditions.  If the “disease” kills one person, the fear of it may kill 20.  General prejudice concerning the danger of viruses is fundamental biological error based on Louis Pasteur’s germ theory, and is itself a perpetrator of auto-suggested illness.  For example, in Africa doctors attribute some AIDS sickness to “voodoo death” syndrome, the term for illnesses induced psychologically.  According to one nurse, “we had people who were symptomatically AIDS patients.  They were dying of AIDS, but when they were tested and found out they were negative they suddenly rebounded and are now perfectly healthy.”  Ironically, if the germ theory were found on facts, it would be correct to fear viruses, except there would be few, if any, humans living to discuss the issues.  These so-called pathogenic entities are to researchers, medical practitioners and the press what criminals are to detectives — the focus and justification of their existence.
The Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say about bacteria, which relates also to viruses:
“The common idea of bacteria in the minds of most people is that of the hidden and sinister scourge lying in wait for mankind.  This popular conception is born of the fact that attention was first focused upon bacteria through the discovery, some seven years ago, of the relationship of bacteria to disease in man, and that in its infancy, the study of bacteriology was a branch of medical science.  Relatively few people assigned to bacteria, the important position in the world of living things that they rightly occupied, for it is only a few of the bacteria known today that have developed in such a way that they can live in the human body, and for everyone of this kind, there are scores of others which are perfectly harmless and far from being regarded as the enemies of mankind, must be numbered among his best friends.
It is in fact, no exaggeration to say that upon the activities of bacteria.  The very existence of man depends; indeed, without bacteria there could be no other living thing in the world; for every animal and plant owes its existence to the fertility of the soil, and this in turn depends upon the activity of the microorganisms which inhabit the soil in almost inconceivable numbers.  It Is one of the main objects of this article to show how true is this statement; there will be found in it only passing reference to the organisms which produce disease in man and animals — for information on these see Pathology and Immunity.  [Encyclopedia Britannica, 14th ed., Volume 2, page 899].
The general message of the foregoing article applies even more aptly to viruses in the sense that much fear has been bred and cultivated around them, although they never produce disease symptoms, whereas the acid waste products of bacteria, yeast, fungus and mold do.  The writer of the above understands bacteria, with the exceptions that symptomgenic bacteria found in man and animals do not produce disease.  [Only secondary symptoms], that their precursors are endogenous to higher organisms, and they have not “developed in such a way that they can live in the human body.”  If anything, the reverse is true.  According to one theory of microbiology, microforms have colonized over eons to become higher organisms.  In one sense, then, the human body has developed as a specialized environment for them.
An important dimension of the bacterial dependence of higher life forms is the floral population in the human digestive tract.  Literally, these “foreign species” keep us alive.  Most bacteria have the same underlying function, whether found in the soil, sewage, in the human digestive tract, or elsewhere in nature: they are an essential part of the life processes of hire organisms.  They will not or cannot attack healthy cells or tissues, but certain ones will recycle sick or dead tissue in much the same way insect pests are drawn to weaker plants.  As Bechamp said, “nothing is the prey of death; all things are the prey of life.”
Following in the wake of misconceptions arising from the fundamental biological error known as the germ theory of disease, defying infiltrates of disease tissue as a newly discovered infectious microforms was the birth of a major corollary error in bio science.
Viral Behavior Reconsidered
Listed below are ways of viruses are said to disrupt or destroy host cells.  According to orthodox medical science and the germ theory advocates.  Following each in its italics is a different interpretation following from microzymian principle:
1.  Viral proteins insert into the host cells , plasma membrane and directly damage its integrity , to promote cell fusion [HIV, measles, and herpes viruses.].
Proteins are attempting to repair membrane damage, or enter cells to repair other proteins.  There is the question as to whether viruses on cell walls are coming or going.  In both cases, it would be a matter of whether or not a cell has been disturbed by excess fermentation and acidity.  But in the former case, the cell would be dysfunctional before attachment occurs, thus requiring the repair complex.  Another possibility, perhaps remote, is that dysfunctional receptors on cells are in need of repair, or they are covered by these complexes to inactivate malfunction of the cells.  Positive electrical charges in a compromised acidic terrain, primarily on acidic molecules from fermentation’s, discharge cell membranes and act as mortar to stick cells together causing rouleau and clotting.
2.  Viruses inhibit a host cell DNA, RNA, or protein synthesis.  For example, polio virus inactivates cap-binding protein, which is essential for protein synthesis, directed by capped host cell mRNA’s, while allowing protein synthesis from uncapped polio virus in mRNA’s.
Protein inactivation is probably being done by fermentation or by acidic toxins from fermentation, while “poliovirus” is produced in the cell to reverse the damage.
3.  Viruses replicate efficiently and lyse host cells, e.g., liver cells by yellow fever, and neurons by poliovirus.
Highly unlikely.  The lysing is more likely caused by acidic mycotoxicosis, or by free radicals released in response to mycotoxic stress, or from other sources [I lysine radiation, for example].  Repair particles are residual after cell wall disruption.
4.  Slow-virus infections [e.g., sub acute sclerosing panencephalitis caused by the measles virus] culminate in severe progressive disease is after a long latency period.
How is this demonstrated?  Perhaps “latency” is a period of unsuccessful or attempted repair that eventually falters.  Symptomology naturally appears in the weakest parts of the body.  Excess acidity is always a systemic problem that localizes, just as cancer is a systemic acidic condition that localizes, even though it its symtogenic influence may later spread.
5.  Viral antigen proteins on the surface of the host cells are recognized by the immune system, and the host lymphocytes attack, the virus infected cells [e.g., liver cells infected with hepatitis B].
Liver cells are damaged beyond repair by exotoxins and mycotoxicosis, and the immune system, our elaborate janitorial service, is cleaning out the garbage.  Perhaps the repair protein antigen is expressed to signal any in response [because the cell is beyond repair], which is one explanation for why there are antibodies to these proteins.
6.  Viruses damage cells involved in the host anti-microbial defense, leading to secondary infections.
The function of immune cells are damaged by bacterial or fungal waste products/acidic and/or overworked by toxic acidic overload, preventing proper cleanup and elimination of disharmonious, symptomgenic elements.
7.  Viral killing the one cell type causes the death of other cells that depend on them, e.g., degeneration of muscle cells enervated by the attack of poliovirus on motor neurons.
Once again, a misinterpretation and lack of understanding that is not viral microforms that damage neurons.  Acidic toxins from bacteria, yeast, fungus and mold — as well as the ferments of glucose, uric acid from proteins, hormones and acetic acids from fats — produce, or influence the body to produce, dis-ease  or inflammatory symptoms.  Not recognizing “virus,” for what it is, observers attribute dis-ease or disease to it.
8.  Host cell responses to viruses include metabolic derangement and transformations resulting in neoplastic changes.
Metabolic derangement has occurred prior to the appearance of repair proteins, due to toxic overload in the cell.  It is more likely that the proteins attempt to prevent cell transformation, and that cancerous development is cell conversion from primarily oxidative to wholly fermentation of metabolism, mediated by yeast, fungus and mold.
9.  According to orthodox theory, viruses enter a host cell and replicate at the host’s expense.  Replication is accomplished using enzymes, which are distinct for each virus family.  For example, RNA polymerase is used by negative stranded RNA viruses degenerates positive stranded mRNA, or as reverse transcriptase is used by retroviruses to generate DNA from their RNA template and to integrate that DNA into the host genome.
It is normal for repair proteins to generate enzymes or acidic waste products as they do their work of repair.
10.  one reason suggested for viral tropism [the tendency to infect some cells, but not others] is the presence or absence of host cell receptors that allow the virus to attach.  It is said, for example, that HIV binds to the proteins [CD4] involved with antigen presentation on a helper.  The lymphocytes, that Epstein-Barr virus binds to the complement receptor [CD2] on macrophages, that rabies virus binds to the acetylcholine receptor on neurons, and that rhino viruses bind to the adhesion proteins [ICAM-1] on mucosal cells.
See answer to number 1 above.
Theoretically, once attach, the entire virion, or a portion containing the genome and essential polymerases, penetrates into the cell saddle plasma in one of three ways: [one] translocation of the entire virus across the plasma membrane; [two] receptor mediated endocytosis of the virus and fusion with endosomal membranes; or , [three] fusion of the viral envelope with the cell membrane.  Theory suggests that within the cell the virus uncoats, separating its genome from its structional components and losing its infectivity before replication.  In either the nucleus or the cytoplasma, newly synthesize viral genomes and capsid proteins are assembled into progeny virions, which may then bud to the plasma membrane.  Unencapsulated viruses may be released also, directly through the membrane.
It is interesting, however, that viruses can somehow choose the “infection.”  To be aborted, latent or persistent, meaning respectively: [one] viral infections with incomplete replication cycles; [two] persisting in the cryptic state, like herpes zoster within a dorsal root ganglion, which suddenly becomes active to produce shingles; [three continuously synthesized virions, with or without altered cell function [e.g., hepatitis B].  These three ideas, especially latency, have arisen as feeble excuses for the untenable virus theory.
11.  In order for viruses to reproduce, they must complete the following four steps:
a] Adsorption and penetration of the cell.  The viral particle binds to the host cell membrane.  This is unusually a specific interaction in which a viral encoded protein on the capsid or a glycoprotein embedded in the virion envelope binds to a host cell membrane receptor and is then internalized.  This internalization occurs by endocytosis or by fusion of the virion envelope with the host cell membrane.
This is the mechanism whereby the viral particle enters the cell for the purposes of carrying out repairs to the damaged DNA or RNA.
b) Uncoating of the virus, so that the nucleic acid can be released from the capsid into the nucleus or cytoplasm.
Repair work may require uncoating.  An uncoated “virus” in the saddle plasma, may have, from the nucleus and not yet have a code, as in the case of hepatitis B , according to medical science.  A coat is then created to protect the nucleic acid, to make a communicative or response to protein complex, or to allow exiting the cell for remote function or for neutralization and recycling by the immune system.
c) Synthesis and assembly of viral products, as well as in addition of the host cell’s own DNA, RNA and protein synthesis.
Protein complex is produced in response to an alarming acidic situation — fermentation and mycotoxic stress — are capable of self-reported replication.  As suggested by Bechamp, the microzyma is specific for each organ, therefore specific repair proteins will be needed for specific cells that make a specific organ that are being disturbed by dietary and/or metabolic acidic waste products.  There is the question of why the great numbers in some cases.  One possibility is simply over reaction; for example, fever can be extreme.  Why?  To remove dietary, metabolic acids or acids from bacteria, yeast, fungus and/or mold.
d) And finally, release of virions from the host cell either by budding or lysis.
[1] Complexes leave the cell for remote function or to be neutralize; [2] repairs have failed, and complexes are released prior to or during the breakdown of the cell by acidic toxins or the immune system.
Further Considerations
Virologists referred to certain microforms as passenger viruses, which are present in asymptomatic situations, riding on their host genetic molecule like a passenger.  To the conventional mind searching for new diseases or for viral cause of unexplained ones, they are most interesting, because the status virologist in the scientific community depends upon the pathogenic potential of the viruses they study.  Due to their location, passenger viruses are thought to have much disease potential, thus their true function goes unnoticed.  These colloidal passengers are the silent majority of animal and human intranuclear proteins essential for genetic repair.
Kalokerinos and Dettman quote Dr. Fred Klenner regarding the changeability of viruses, “I am of the opinion that virus units have the potential of going from one type to another by altering their protein coat.  We see chickenpox at Thanksgiving, mumps at Christmas, read measles in the spring, and polio and Coxsackie in the summer.”  Seasonal appearance of different forms may be mediated by variations of imbalance in the biological terrain or nutritive median due to the fermentation of dietary excesses such as sugar and animal proteins that accompany holidays and seasons, calling for different repair proteins.  For example, outbreaks of polio have been associated with sugar consumption in summer.  Various psychoemotional stresses correspond to the seasons as well.”
Supporting the general idea of dietary culpability is a statement published by the great English physician, Sir Robert McCarrison in 1936: “obsessed with the invisible microbe, virus, protozoa as all-important excite tens of disease, subservient to lavatory methods of diagnosis, hidebound by our system of nomenclature, we have to forget the most fundamental of all rules for the physician, but the right kind of food [nutrition] is the most important single factor in the promotion of health and the rhonchi to food.  The most important single factor in the promotion of disease.”
Six years before BeChamp identified the microzyma as a ferment and, with his devoted associate, Professor Estor, began a 13 year odyssey of research into its nature. Florence Nightingale published a statement about the germ theory,  In ‘Notes on Nursing’, first addition, 1860, she said of infection:
“Diseases are not individuals arranged in classes, like cats and dogs, but conditions growing out of one another.
Is it not living in a continual mistake to look upon diseases, as we do now, as separate entities, which must exist, like cats and dogs, instead of looking upon them as conditions, like a dirty and a clean condition, and just as much under our own control; or rather, as the reactions of kindly nature against the conditions in which we have placed ourselves?
I was brought out . . . . distinctly to believe that smallpox, for instance, was a thing of which there was once a first specimen in the world, which went on propagating itself in a perpetual chain of dissent, just as much as that there was a first dog, [or a first pair of dogs], and that smallpox would not begin itself anymore than a new dog would begin without there having been a parent dog.
Since then, I have seen it with my eyes and smelt it with my nose smallpox growing up in the first specimens, ear in close rooms or in overcrowded wards, where it could not by any possibility have been ‘caught’,  but must have begun.  Nay, more, I have seen diseases begin, grow up, and pass into one another . . . . I have seen, for instance, with a little overcrowding, continued fever grow up; and with a little more, typhoid fever; and when little more, typhus, and all in the same ward or hut.
Would it not be far better, truer, and more practical, if we looked upon disease in this light?  For diseases, as all experience shows, are adjectives, not noun- substantives.”
That is, symptoms [called diseases] are described first of the situation.
I find legitimate BeChamp’s conclusion that what are called germs of the air are fundamentally microzyma’s of beings, which are being consumed by the recycling process, i.e., some kind of vegetative digestion — putrefaction or fermentation.  In short, there are no pre-existing disease germ species.  The principals of microbial medicine constitute a fundamental biological ERROR!!!!!!  As BeChamp said, “the microbial doctrine is the greatest scientific silliness of this age.”  This is not to say there is no transmission, only that invasion is not necessary for symptogenesis, nor is it the primary mechanism for illness.  It is to say that for transmission to take place, susceptibility in the form of a compromised terrain must pre-exist in the receiver, who was then likely to be ill anyway.  With the exception of the immune component in the mucosal barrier, primary host “resistance” is a function of terrain condition rather than immunity per se.
Phantom Viruses
Hepatitis can be a painful symptom that has yielded profitable virus hunting opportunities in recent years.  Although there are several categories of this disorder, three main varieties of what is called “acute viral hepatitis” exist: Type A [formally, ‘Infectious hepatitis’], Type B [formally ‘Serum hepatitis’], and hepatitis Type C (formally ‘non A, non-B’].  The corresponding viruses are HIV, HBV, and the non-A, non-B ‘group’, now called C. Type A is said to be caused by an RNA virus, spread primarily by fecal contamination of water and food, with blood and secretions also possibly being infectious [but it is due to the acidic toxins associated with unsanitary conditions].  Hepatitis B, discovered in the sixties, is said to be caused by a DNA virus, which replicates in the hepatocyte nucleus and receives its surface coat in the cytoplasma.  It is said to be transmitted by transfused blood or blood products, or via common use of needles by intravenous drug users [but it is due primarily to over-acidification from the drugs, especially heroine.  The exchange of body fluids into the blood, whether by sterilize needles, abusive sexual activity, eccentric sexual activity, etc. can also play a role overtime, because of repeated immune stress caused by foreign proteins].  Third World babies with poor nutrition and unsanitary conditions around the time of birth are also susceptible.
The third type of hepatitis, discovered in the seventies, is found among drug users and alcoholics, and accounts for 80 to 90% of hepatitis caused by blood transfusion.  It is thus akin to B type and was at first thought by scientists to be hepatitis B until thorough testing a subject revealed no virus B nor A, for that matter.  It was thus called “non-A, non-B” hepatitis and thought to be at least two viruses and perhaps more.
In 1987 scientists believed they found a single virus causing the third type, what is known today as the hepatitis C virus.  However, what they identified was an antibody, they associated with a virus.  Now, just as with HIV, they could test patients for antibodies against an elusive or invisible phantom virus.  With this new observation, however, new paradoxes confronted the viral hypothesis.  Huge numbers of people testing positive for the Phantom C virus never developed any symptoms.  Hepatitis C is truly the result of an over-acidification or toxification of the largest filter organ in the body by such substances as lactic acid, acetylaldehyde and ethanol alcohol — not the disease of a pathological phantom virus.  It is interesting to note also that all these hepatitis viruses have incubation periods of two to 25 weeks, violating Farr’s law, [see below], yet are not classified as slow viruses.  Also, the point at which a “natural invasion” takes place, as opposed to a highly artificial in objective one, and thus, how true incubation periods are determined, is another interesting question.  Bottom-line there is no Hepatitis C virus.
A recent example of unwarranted panic in American bio medicine was the eminent hantavirus of 1994.  Presumably, it had jumped species, from mouse to man [the American Navajo Indians].  However, after supposedly killing a number of people, this phantom virus apparently made peace with the Indians and retired to its mouse reservoir.  The virus failed to materialize.  A front-page article in the San Francisco Chronicle reported that CDC “epidemiologist across the nation are carefully monitoring the deer mouse population and the level of virus within it.”  But all that was left to discover of the former.  “Navajo flu” by the CDC epidemiologist [shown in their space suits] were healthy mice in the mountains.  The Navajo flu is nothing new to the Native Americans and is most likely tied to sanitation, nutrition and lifestyle.
In May 1995 , the CDC announced the new, threatening Ebola virus.  The deadly killer virus was expected to leave its hidden reservoir in the rain forest of Africa to claim Europe and the United States.  An article in Time magazine was peppered with men in space suits and color electron micrographs of the virus  [even though electron microscopes cannot take color pictures and the pictures were of parasites].  A CDC virologist suggested the virus could leave the rain forest a if “we get a virus that is both deadly to man and transmitted in the air.”  We are thus asked to fear the false image of virus somehow being launched into the air, perhaps by injection from a host, and then floating on a killer breeze to other lands.  A more imaginable scenario was suggested by European epidemiologist who heads the United Nations AIDS program.  Echoing the the CDC’s alarm, he stated, “it’s theoretically feasible.  Then infected person from Kuwait could go to Tunisia, get on a plane to New York, fall ill, and present transmission risk there.”  But within a month, the virus had disappeared in Africa, and not a single Ebola case was reported in the United States or Europe.
The World Health Organization announced on December 19, 1995 that the Ebola virus epidemic that killed 245 people in West Africa was over.  All tests on any remaining suspected cases were negative.  A somewhat unsettling revelation was that every Ebola outbreak in Africa, “is associated to have spread to public hospitals.”  As it turned out, it was associated with reused hypodermic needles in these hospitals.  Just like hantavirus, Ebola vanished, never to be heard from again, until NOW!  Most interesting is that this so-called epidemic, as epidemics will, stopped without vaccines or other drugs.  Consider the impact such stories have made upon our minds and on the way we view and understand germs.  What’s next in the virodrama, the Andromeda strain?  NO!  Here we go again with the same old phantom viral story!
There is one insidious possibility that must be mentioned in passing.  Some mysterious outbreaks of the past have shown years later to have been man-made.  In some cases, government agency have used the public to test releases of organisms and weak biochemical acidic toxins in order to verify, through medical reports, expectations of bio-warfare activity.  These incidents and the whole story of such behavior is well documented in the book, all higher forms of killing by Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman [Hill and Wang, 1982].  In this scenario, the cause of such an incident would be constructed officially, or left as a mystery, in order to draw attention away from the truth.
  1. To read Part 2 and Part 3 and for all references for this article read Sick and Tired by Dr. Robert O. Young – http://www.phoreveryoung.com, http://www.phmiracle.com or http://www.phmiraclebooks.com


Consensus medicine tells us that HIV causes AIDS. However, the consensus is invariably proved incorrect in the ever-advancing world of science.

Peter Duesberg, professor of molecular and cell biology and one of the first scientists to isolate the cancer gene, says the consensus about AIDS is certainly wrong; as more evidence is streaming forth showing that HIV is an antigen but an antibody and is harmless to the body.

Professor Peter Duesberg

In his controversial book “Inventing the AIDS Virus” Professor Duesberg accurately states infectious diseases, by nature, will spread through the population without paying attention to age, gender, sexual orientation or social status. However, in the decades since the 80’s first gave us the AIDS scare the predicted epidemic has primarily remained within certain risk groups. To state this fact is not to trivialize a disease that blights the lives of many, but to help sharpen minds with a statement of proven science.

Pointedly, Professor Duesberg is seeing thousands of fellow scientists and campaign groups such as rethinkingaids.com agreeing that the reason why AIDS cases have gone up over the years is due to artificiality. That is: the definition of what AIDS IS has been repeatedly changed. Have all you skeptics of man-made global warming not heard of this trick before?

As those of us who have fought for years against the climate fraud can attest, when you take on “Big Science” you take on a ruthless self-serving industry less concerned with scientific ethics and more about building profits and forging consensus. For some ideological, and for others financial motives are the primer. But the smoking gun of any scientific fraud is the quality (or lack thereof) of the empirical evidence.

In July 2012 the Austrian biologist and researcher Christl Meyer presented new scientific evidence that the so-called “HIV-virus,” the claimed cause of AIDS, does not exist. Meyer compellingly exposes the fallacies of consensus HIV/AIDS theories and why the HIV vaccine campaign may constitute genocide against Africans and the Third World.

Meyer echoes the science of HIV co-discoverer Luc Montagnier, who in an extended House of Numbers interview stated:

“I believe we can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected, our immune system will get rid of the virus within a few weeks, if you have a good immune system.”

Then there is the work of Harvard-trained MD Nancy Banks who stirred up a hornets’ nest with her book “AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and Empire”, subtitled “The Deadly Virus of International Greed.” Dr. Banks spent 25 years as a general obstetrician/gynecologist (OBGYN) attending patients at North General, Nyack Hospital, Columbia Presbyterian and Mt. Sinai Hospital and Medical Center. She cared for thousands of women who trusted her as their primary physician, obstetrician and surgeon.

Nancy Banks

In a recorded interview Dr. Banks offers a wide ranging discussion about the fraudulent science that underpins the AIDS scare with Terry Michael and RA President David Crowe at HowPositiveAreYou.com.

While Principia Scientific International (PSI) holds no official position in this controversy we do support any and all scientists who – like us – advocate openness and transparency. Many PSI members have learned from bitter personal experience that honest whistleblowers are too often condemned for evincing evidence that is “inconvenient” to a mainstream often set on preserving a lucrative status quo.

For that reason PSI is pleased to announce it has opened up a dialogue with the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice(OMSJ) to explore how we may mutually interact for the furtherance of defeating junk science. John O’Sullivan (PSI’s CEO) and Clark Baker (OMSJ’s CEO and Principal Investigator) are currently exploring how our two complementary organizations may implement strategies to tackle science corruption.

In the meantime PSI readers are encouraged to take a look at the work of OMSJ as well as organizations like Rethinking AIDSHEAL LondonThe Perth Group and thousands of ethical scientists and researchers not afraid to speak out. Feedback is welcome from members and non-members in the open comments section below.

Written by John O’Sullivan on 09 Jun 2013

If It’s NOT HIV That Causes AIDS Then What Causes AIDS?

Contrary to popular belief, HIV is not necessary to explain acquired immune deficiency and the illnesses associated with AIDS.

To understand why this is so, it is first necessary to understand what AIDS is. AIDS is not a new disease or illness; it is a new name or designation for 29 previously known diseases and conditions. As the NIH states in its comprehensive report on AIDS, “the designation ‘AIDS’ is a surveillance tool.”191 Since 1981, the surveillance tool AIDS has been used to track and record familiar diseases when they appear in people who have tested positive for antibodies associated with HIV.

The AIDS virus hypothesis supposes that the health problems renamed AIDS develop as a result of infection with HIV; that the virus somehow disables the body’s defense system that protects against opportunistic illness, allowing the development of one or more of 29 diseases, such as yeast infection, certain cancers, pneumonia, salmonella, diarrhea, or tuberculosis, which are then diagnosed as AIDS. However, every AIDS indicator disease occurs among people who test HIV negative, none are exclusive to those who test positive and all AIDS diseases existed before the adoption of the name “AIDS.”

Prior to the designation AIDS, these 29 diseases were not thought to have a single, common cause. In fact, all have recognized causes and treatments that are unrelated to HIV. For example, yeast infection is a widespread problem due to an imbalance of natural bacteria. The yeast infections that occur in people who test HIV positive and in people who test HIV negative are caused by the same imbalance of natural bacteria. All the opportunistic illnesses called AIDS have various, medically proven causes that do not involve HIV.

Immune deficiency can be acquired by several risk factors that are not infectious or transmitted through blood or blood products. The following factors are widely recognized causes of immune suppression, compromised health, and opportunistic infections, as documented in the medical literature for more than 70 years. Chronic, habitual and multiple exposures to these risks can cause the group of symptoms called AIDS.192 In fact, there is no case of AIDS described in the medical literature without one or more of these health risk factors.193

Physical Risk Factors

These risks include malnutrition and chronic lack of sleep. In 1985, orthodox AIDS researcher and director of NIAID, Dr. Anthony Fauci declared that malnutrition was the most prevalent cause of immune deficiency diseases throughout the world, particularly in developing regions such as Africa where common illnesses like measles run rampant and take millions of lives.194
The medical literature notes that malnutrition and infection are invariably linked, as one condition aggravates the other. Hunger and endemic disease are familiar problems in those countries around the globe thought to be under siege from AIDS. Intrauterine malnutrition occurs when expectant mothers are improperly nourished, and can result in prolonged, sometimes lifelong, immune suppression.195

Poverty, crowded living conditions and unclean water promote endemic disease and compromised health. The populations in many developing regions of the world are devastated by rampant infections with common microbes that pose little or no health threat to people in industrialized nations.

Infections due to malnutrition immunodeficiency are the world’s leading causes of infant and child death.195 Among citizens of industrialized nations, subclinical malnutrition, rather than starvation leads to compromised immune function, especially when combined with chronic lack of sleep.196 People who make habitual and prolonged use of certain drugs like methamphetamines, heroin and crack cocaine often suffer from malnutrition and chronic lack of sleep.

Chemical Risk Factors

Immune-compromising chemicals include pharmaceutical drugs such as AZT and other cancer chemotherapy compounds, protease inhibitors, antibiotics and steroids, and recreational drugs such as cocaine, crack, heroin, nitrites (poppers), and methamphetamines (crystal, speed).
Chemotherapy targets and destroys the bone marrow cells from which all immune cells derive. They also kill fully formed immune cells in addition to killing B cells and red blood cells.196,197 Chemotherapy destroys the digestive system by killing the cells that compose the inner lining of the digestive tract which interferes with the body’s ability to absorb and digest nutrients, causing malnutrition. Even when used very briefly, chemotherapy suppresses normal immune function, increases susceptibility to a variety of opportunistic infections, and can cause life-threatening anemia and diarrhea. AZT, ddI, ddC, D4T and 3TC are all chemotherapy compounds used as antiviral AIDS treatments.

There are many pharmaceutical drugs known to suppress the immune system, particularly when used for prolonged periods of time. Protease inhibitors cause impaired liver function and liver failure (the liver removes disease-causing toxins from the body) in addition to kidney failure, dangerously high cholesterol levels, diarrhea and other health-compromising effects. Steroids are a known cause of immune deficiency often prescribed to AIDS patients to counteract the muscle wasting caused by AZT.198 Antibiotics, especially when used habitually, can cause yeast infection and diarrhea, two conditions that can lead to malnutrition.199 Septra and Bactrim are sulfonamide antibiotics commonly prescribed for continuous, prophylactic or preventative use by HIV positives. These drugs are leftover from the days before penicillin; they do not target invading microbes as narrowly as modern antibiotics and are notorious for their side effects.200 Both cause nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, anorexia, bone marrow destruction, rashes, fever, hepatitis, and anemia by interfering with the production of red blood cells.201

The immunosuppressive effects of recreational drug abuse are well-documented in medical literature dating back to the turn of the century. They include pneumonias, mouth sores, fevers, endocarditis, bacterial infections and night sweats, all conditions now associated with AIDS.202 Amphetamine drugs suppress the appetite, causing chronic users to suffer from malnutrition. Many habitual users of heroin and crack do not provide themselves with adequate food, sleep, shelter and healthcare.

Prolonged exposure to common chemical toxins such as insecticides and herbicides can also impair immune function.203

Biological Risk Factors

These risks include multiple exposures to and/or chronic infections with syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia and other venereal diseases, hepatitis, tuberculosis, malaria, fungal diseases, amoebas and parasites such as giardia, bacterial infections such as staph and E coli, chronic bowel infections, blood transfusions, and the use of blood products. In addition to the damaging effects of recurrent infections, many of the pharmaceuticals used as treatment have adverse effects on immune function.

Factor VIII (the blood clotting agent used by hemophiliacs) and blood transfusions are immune suppressive and leave patients vulnerable to infection.204 Due to the serious conditions for which transfusions are necessary and the deleterious effects they have on the immune system, half of all HIV negative transfusion recipients die within a year of receiving a transfusion.204

Psychological Risk Factors

Chronic anxiety, panic, stress and depression have been shown to compromise health, damage immune function, and result in symptoms identical to AIDS.205 Mental stress provokes production of the hormone cortisol; excessive cortisol causes rapid and dramatic reductions in T cells, a condition known as lymphocytopenia. Within minutes, stress induces cortisol levels to increase as much as 20-fold. High levels of cortisol can eventually cause what medical texts describe as “significant atrophy of all the lymphoid tissue throughout the body” which may lead to “fulminating infection and death from diseases that would otherwise not be lethal.”206
A profound fear of AIDS is enough to cause even people who repeatedly test HIV negative to develop physical symptoms of AIDS.207 Termed “AIDS-phobia,” this condition is characterized by weight loss, wasting, reduced T cell counts and other signs considered indicative of AIDS, and typically follows intimate contact with people who sufferers believe may be HIV positive.

Beliefs and expectations are well-known to manifest in the physical body. The life-altering influence of beliefs was detailed dramatically in 1942 by Dr. Walter B. Cannon in his accounts of a phenomenon he called “voodoo death,” a form of capital punishment practiced among certain Aboriginal tribes. Cannon reported that shaman, tribal medical authorities thought to possess special powers, were able to kill errant tribe members by simply pointing at them with a bone. Convinced of the shaman’s ability to invoke a lethal curse, the people pointed at died within a matter of hours or days.208

In modern medicine, the power of expectation is a commonly accepted fact known as the “placebo effect.” Placebos are inert chemical substances disguised as active preparations and given to patients in place of drugs. The health benefits gained from a placebo occur because the person taking it expects a positive effect. Since the benefits of any drug may be due in part to this placebo effect, most new drugs are tested against a placebo preparation.209
A recent study conducted at the University of Toronto demonstrated the profound physiological effects of expectation with regard to placebos. Researchers found that cardiac patients who strictly adhered to a placebo treatment regimen lived longer than patients who did not take their placebo regularly. In summarizing the study, lead researcher Dr. Paul Dorian noted, “What you believe has an important influence on your outcome.”210

How These Risk Factors Apply to All AIDS Groups

There is not one case of AIDS described in the medical literature that does not include one or more immune-destroying health risk factors. There is no case of AIDS documented in a person whose sole risk is exposure to HIV. Every case of AIDS involves factors known to damage the immune system and leave a person vulnerable to debilitating infection and deadly illness.211

Men Who Have Sex With Men

Well-documented causes of immune dysfunction can explain AIDS illnesses among men who have sex with men although none of these causes are unique to this risk group or can be generalized to include all gay men. In fact, focusing attention on certain sexual practices rather than recognized health risks obscures our understanding of immune suppression and limits approaches to preventing and resolving AIDS.

Nitrites, more commonly known as poppers, are immune-suppressive, carcinogenic drugs chronically used by some gay men. At one time, 95% of gay men in major urban areas like Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco reported using poppers.212 Nitrite use correlates with Kaposi’s Sarcoma (KS) and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, two AIDS-defining cancers found almost exclusively in this risk group.213 There are several studies that further strengthen the correlation between poppers and KS by documenting KS in HIV negative gay men who use poppers.213 KS is hardly ever found among members of any other CDC risk group or among women with AIDS, and is never diagnosed in children or infants with AIDS.213 In 1981 when AIDS was first identified, half of all AIDS diagnoses were for KS. As popper use has diminished, so has KS which since 1993 has accounted for less than 5% of all new AIDS cases.214

In the only studies that asked gay men with AIDS about recreational drugs, 93% to 100% of participants acknowledged using cocaine, crack cocaine, poppers, heroin, ecstasy, methamphetamines like speed and crystal, and/or Special K (an animal tranquilizer).215
Combinations of parasitic infections that include amebiasis and giardiasis along with rectal infections, syphilis, and gonorrhea can result in acute diarrhea which in turn causes malabsorption and malnutrition, or wasting.216 This collection of infections and resultant problems was commonly known as Gay Bowel Syndrome in the years before AIDS.216 The CDC reports that 20% to 50% of all gay men in major US cities have been treated, often repeatedly, for intestinal parasites using immune suppressive pharmaceutical drugs.217 Antibiotic treatments for recurrent venereal infections are immune suppressive, as is the practice of using these antibiotics on a regular basis as a prevention. Steroids are another immune damaging drug frequently prescribed to offset the wasting caused by diarrhea and malabsorption.217
Campaigns that encourage HIV testing, the consuming of toxic AIDS drugs, and living in fear of AIDS are primarily directed at the gay community. Many gay magazines may have up to half of their commercial advertising devoted to AIDS-related promotions.218 Such constant emphasis on AIDS gives rise to the notion of the inevitability of AIDS, a belief which can evoke chronic terror, despair and hopelessness, psychological risk factors known to impair immunity and compromise health.

The chance of registering false positive on an HIV test is greater for people with high levels of non-HIV antibodies and microbes in their blood. Antibodies produced in response to the particular microbial and viral infections frequently found in some gay men are documented causes of false positive HIV test results.218

For people who test HIV positive, the drugs prescribed as preventative treatments for opportunistic AIDS-defining infections become harmful and even deadly when used on a daily, continuous basis. Bactrim and Septra, for example, are powerful sulfonamide antibiotics that kill digestive flora and cause anemia and bone marrow destruction. The anti-HIV drugs AZT, ddI, D4T, ddC and 3TC are all highly toxic chemotherapies that destroy the immune and digestive systems, in addition to causing five of the 29 official AIDS-defining illnesses.219 Two 1993 studies conducted in the US and Canada found that every one of several hundred gay men with AIDS had a history of significant recreational drug and/or AIDS drug use.220

Identifying this risk group as people who engage in habitual, prolonged use of recreational and/or pharmaceutical drugs, have chronic exposure to a multitude of infectious microbes, who suffer from chronic malnourishment and/or chronic fear of HIV and AIDS provides a more appropriate and comprehensive explanation of immune suppression that invites many possibilities for prevention and resolution.

Injection Drug Users

Members of this risk group account for 35% of all diagnosed AIDS cases, while another 4% of people diagnosed with AIDS cite heterosexual contact with injection drug users as their sole risk. However, the majority of people who initially claim intimate contact with IV drug users as their only risk later acknowledge taking drugs themselves.221

Considering only injection drug use as a high risk activity for AIDS disregards the immune suppressive effects brought about by habitual use of non-injected street drugs as well as the many health-compromising factors that can accompany the regular, long-term use of illicit chemicals. The emphasis on sharing needles over the damaging effects of the narcotics injected with the needles distorts our view of immune dysfunction and prevents application of practical solutions to the health problems common to this risk group.

Prolonged, habitual consumption of drugs such as heroin, crack, speed, and cocaine, whether taken by injection or other means, is well-known to disable immune function. Chronic use of these drugs is documented to bring about many conditions synonymous with AIDS including pneumonias, tuberculosis, mouth sores, fevers, night sweats, bacterial infections, and endocarditis. Malnutrition, the number one cause of immune deficiency diseases worldwide, and multiple infections are frequent side effects of habitual injection drug use, and are factors that suppress immunity.

Antibodies generated in response to the multiple infections and chemical toxins typical of chronic drug use can cause false positive readings on HIV tests. Positive test results most frequently lead to ongoing treatment with various immune suppressive antibiotics and chemotherapy drugs, and to a sense of hopelessness and profound despair.

A more compassionate and inclusive way to portray this diverse group is as people who engage in habitual, prolonged use of recreational drugs, have chronic exposure to a multitude of infectious microbes and toxins through septic syringes or septic living conditions; who suffer from chronic malnourishment, lack of adequate sleep, the immune suppressive effects of AIDS drugs, and/or the chronic despair that follows an HIV positive or AIDS diagnosis. The immune deficiency diseases caused by these multiple and variant factors can be resolved with treatments that do not involve toxic anti-HIV drugs and long-term use of powerful antibiotics.

Transfusion Recipients and Hemophiliacs

Hemophiliacs and blood transfusion recipients together make up 2% of adult AIDS cases in the US. As noted previously, Factor VIII, the blood clotting treatment used by hemophiliacs, is itself immune suppressive. Hemophilia is a life-threatening condition in people with or without an HIV positive diagnosis. Ryan White, the young HIV positive hemophiliac who became famous as an AIDS victim, actually died of common complications attributed to hemophilia (internal bleeding and liver failure), not of illnesses that define AIDS.223

Blood transfusions suppress the immune system. Medical experts note that higher amounts of blood transfusions among hospitalized patients correlate with higher death rates. The authors of one recent study on transfusions specifically mention that the immune suppressive effects of transfusions leave recipients vulnerable to deadly opportunistic infection.224

Factor VIII and blood transfusions can cause positive results on HIV antibody tests in persons never exposed to HIV by triggering the production of antibodies that react with the nonspecific proteins used in the HIV antibody test. Once a person has tested positive, they are subject to immune suppressive drug treatment regimens, and the terror of developing AIDS.
Members of these risk groups can be more accurately described as people with serious preexisting health challenges, critical or chronic exposure to immune suppressive blood products and toxic AIDS drugs, and/or who are affected by the chronic despair of a fatal diagnosis. Based on this view, immune compromising anti-HIV chemotherapy and continuous antibiotic treatments would compound preexisting health problems, rather than resolve them.

Heterosexual Contact

Six percent of Americans diagnosed with AIDS cite heterosexual contact as their sole AIDS risk. However, upon further investigation, 60% to 99% of these people are reclassified as injection drug users and/or men who have sex with men, groups with identifiable health risks documented to cause immune dysfunction.225 As previously noted, people diagnosed with AIDS voluntarily select a risk group from among six categories determined by the CDC which limits health risks to possible exposure to HIV through sex or blood.

The damage caused by AIDS chemotherapy and the acceptance of a fatal diagnosis are sufficient to bring about serious illness and even death in people with no other risk factors.
Members of this group may be better described as people with no health risk factors acknowledged by the CDC who, because of their positive HIV status, regularly consume chemotherapy and/or engage in continuous treatment with antibiotics and other immune suppressive pharmaceutical drugs, and/or suffer from the chronic panic and hopelessness of a fatal diagnosis.

Adolescents, Children and Infants

Although teenagers and children are not a specific AIDS risk group, cases of AIDS among young people, however rare, are a matter of great concern. The fact that babies are diagnosed with AIDS has been used as an argument against non-HIV explanations for AIDS illnesses. Despite widely held beliefs, the majority of AIDS cases that occur among children and adolescents can be explained by the same causes of immune suppression prevalent in adults with AIDS.
In 1998, new AIDS cases among this country’s 26 million teens totaled 293; of these, 229 offered information which placed them in the two primary CDC defined AIDS risk groups for adults.226

Over 80% of the mothers of babies diagnosed with AIDS voluntarily acknowledge using injection drugs during pregnancy, a practice which almost universally results in intrauterine malnutrition. The remaining cases of AIDS in infants and children may be due to the immune suppressive medical treatments given in response to an HIV positive test result, or to the same factors that cause HIV negative babies to suffer from pneumonia, bacterial infections, and immune disorders. In 1998, new AIDS cases in children age 13 and under totaled 382.227

Residents of Developing Nations

In stark contrast to the US and Europe, AIDS cases in developing areas of the world are found almost exclusively among non-drug using heterosexuals.228 Mainstream AIDS experts offer no plausible reason why AIDS would spread primarily through drug-free heterosexual contact only outside the US and Europe.

A coherent explanation for AIDS cases in developing areas of the world is the well-known health risks shared by these countries, widespread poverty and malnutrition; lack of clean water, a regular food supply, and sanitary living conditions; limited access to medical care; endemic diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria, and parasitic infections that manifest in conditions identical to AIDS; and the practice of diagnosing AIDS based on a nonspecific set of clinical symptoms.

Although HIV tests are not required for an AIDS diagnosis in many parts of the world, widespread exposure to hepatitis, tuberculosis, leprosy, malaria and other conditions are more than sufficient to account for positive results on the nonspecific HIV antibody tests. 229
Resolving the immune suppressive conditions caused by poverty and malnutrition provides a means to alleviate the suffering of many people in developing nations who are currently counted and treated as victims of AIDS.

When considering non-HIV explanations for AIDS, consider that:
AIDS is a collection of familiar illnesses, not a disease.

Since 1993, more than half of all new AIDS diagnoses in the US are given to people who are not ill. In 1997, two-thirds of Americans diagnosed with AIDS had no symptoms or illness.*
Acquired immune deficiency predates the creation of the category “AIDS” and has numerous, well-documented causes.

There are no AIDS cases noted in the medical literature in which exposure to HIV has proved to be the sole health risk factor.

There are well-documented causes for every AIDS disease that do not involve HIV, and all illnesses now called AIDS occur in the absence of HIV.

HIV tests do not test for the actual virus, but for antiviral proteins or genetic material that are not specific to HIV.

The chance of a positive reaction on a nonspecific HIV antibody test increases proportionately with the level of other antibodies and microbes found in the blood.

Five of the six AIDS risk groups defined by the CDC have health risk factors that involve multiple, chronic exposure to viruses, bacteria and other antigens known to produce antibodies
identical to those associated with HIV.

Once a person has tested HIV antibody positive, chemotherapy and other immune suppressing chemicals are almost always prescribed for treatment or prevention of AIDS.

Alternative explanations for AIDS provide opportunities for effective AIDS prevention and for using practical, nontoxic approaches to resolving AIDS.

1997 was the last year that the CDC provided information on how many AIDS cases were diagnosed in people who are not sick.

Defined Terms:

Endemic: A medical term applied to a disease or disorder that is constantly present in a particular region or in a specific group of people.

Cancer Chemotherapy: Drugs used to treat cancer. Most anticancer drugs are cytotoxic (kill or damage cells). Others are synthetic forms of hormones. All anticancer drugs prevent cells from growing and dividing. Some work by damaging the cell’s DNA; others block the chemical processes in the cell necessary for growth. Side effects of treatment include nausea, vomiting, and life-threatening diarrhea. By altering the rate at which cells grow and divide, anticancer drugs reduce the number of blood cells produced by the bone marrow, causing anemia and increased susceptibility to infection.

Endocarditis: Inflammation of the internal lining of the heart.

Incorrect Information about HIV and AIDS Costs Lives
Can you imagine receiving a fatal diagnosis without being told the diagnosis is based on an unproven idea and an uncertain test? Being instructed to take powerful, experimental drugs without being told these drugs compromise health, destroy functions necessary to sustain life, and were approved for use without adequate testing? Being informed that you have, or should expect, deadly illnesses without being told that these same illnesses are not considered fatal when they occur in “normal” people?

For anyone who tests HIV positive, getting all the facts is a matter of life and death. The important decisions a person makes should be based on thorough, verifiable data. All of us need and have the right to receive honest and complete information about HIV and AIDS.

Almost every AIDS organization in the country offers free instruction for people who test HIV positive. Standard information includes how to prepare a will, how to collect disability, health insurance, and public benefits, what drugs and tests to take, and which diseases to anticipate, all based on the assumption that HIV positives are or will be ill and do not have long to live.

Information on AIDS that is free from bias, that accurately describes tests and drugs, and offers facts that support a will to live, participate in society, and cultivate a healthy future are rarely, if ever mentioned. Some AIDS groups even lobby to limit public access to data that undermine their dire presentations of HIV and AIDS.

For many people handed an HIV positive diagnosis, these brief pages provide their first awareness that a normal, healthy life is not something they can only hope for, but something they can choose to achieve. Unfortunately for most people who test positive, the AIDS education they receive portrays their choices as being limited to toxic drug therapy or devastating illness, and encourages chronic fear, sadness, and resignation to an early death.

There are thousands of HIV positives who lead healthy lives without toxic AIDS drugs. What they have in common is not some unique, mysterious gene or a weakened strain of the virus, but an open-minded approach to information, an understanding of basic principles of medicine and science, and the knowledge that the responsibility for their well-being is ultimately their own. For more information on their lives, please see The Other Side of AIDS on page 94.

This book examines only a portion of the growing body of scientific, medical and epidemiological evidence that refutes popularly accepted ideas about HIV and AIDS. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct further research and use the resources offered here.

To the degree that we allow unfounded ideas about HIV and AIDS to determine our actions, influence our choices, dictate our public policies, or define our world view, we are all victims of AIDS.

Since the 1984 announcement that HIV causes AIDS, all AIDS research has been based on the hypothesis that HIV, an inexplicably lethal new virus, is responsible for a group of previously known, disconnected diseases renamed AIDS. Setting the focus of all AIDS efforts on HIV, a virus that strains the rules of biology, epidemiology and logic, has rendered humankind few, if any, beneficial results.

The lives of over 400,000 Americans have been given to the notion that HIV is the only possible cause of AIDS, and that toxic drugs offer the only possible prevention, treatment, or hope for a cure. Many more lives have been forever altered by a positive result on a non-standardized test for harmless antibodies that may or may not be associated with HIV.

More than $50 billion in federal AIDS funding has provided no significant understanding of HIV, has produced no safe and effective therapies, and has not brought us any closer to ending AIDS. Instead, we have constructed a powerful AIDS establishment that regulates our news, limits our access to information, and demands an ever greater allocation of our resources and support. Rather than helping to resolve AIDS, we have funded the growth of multi-billion dollar industries, institutions and organizations that depend on AIDS and on our continued devotion to the narrow and unproductive HIV hypothesis.

Objective Examination of HIV and AIDS is Fundamental to Progress.

To understand and solve AIDS, it is necessary to investigate all legitimate scientific data, even when such information challenges our present understanding and perceptions. Progress in any area depends on the ability to engage in an unbiased evaluation of facts, to raise critical questions and to conduct an objective search for meaningful answers. Silence = Death…Of People, Ideas and Progress

” There is classical science, the way it’s supposed to work, and then there’s religion. I regained my sanity when I realized that AIDS science was a religious discourse. The one thing I will go to my grave not understanding is why everyone was so quick to accept everything the government said as truth. Especially the central myth: The cause of AIDS is known. What in the world made activists accept tha, ton the basis of a press conference, no less?

“My only theory is that AIDS requires the daily management of massive amounts of uncertainty, and people cling to any certainty they can find. Even if it’s false.”
Michael Callen, author, AIDS activist (deceased),Genre magazine, February/March, 1994
“Most HIV trials are useless rubbish. Research scientists [outside AIDS research] laugh at us. To them a good sample size is 30,000 people. We do studies with 1,500 people and think that’s wonderful when the actual number of relevant patients is sometimes so small, you cannot rule out chance as the reason for the results you get. It is also unethical to run trials of drugs in places like Malaysia with only 30 people involved and then try to justify these flawed trials because some people got access to drugs who otherwise would have had nothing.”

Kevin Frost, Manager of Research Programs for the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR), Positive Nation, September 1998

“The story of AIDS is deeply connected with the vicissitudes of the theory that viruses cause cancer and the failure of the cancer research program. Michael Verney-Elliot put it most acidly when he said: ‘From the people who didn’t bring you the virus that causes cancer, it’s the virus that doesn’t cause AIDS.'”

Jad Adams, Author, The HIV Myth, 1989

“AIDS is not another disease, it is the most metaphorical disease in history. It is the ultimate triumph of politics over science.”

Michael Fumento, Author, The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, 1990

“Perhaps I’d feel different about it if I thought people were dying from AIDS. But I don’t. I think they’re dying from bad medicine, bad drugs, bad attitudes. There is nothing I want from ‘Big Daddy’ I don’t want his medicines, his laws, his approval.”

Gavin Dillard, Author, In the Flesh, HIV positive since 1985, San Francisco Frontiers, May 20, 1999

“In the September 4 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, the CDC announced that a diagnosis of AIDS no longer requires an HIV test. The government now considers you an AIDS carrier if you suffer from any of the maladies on its new list of diseases indicative of AIDS, including such relatively common infections as herpes simplex, tuberculosis, Salmonellosis and the shockingly broad category ‘other bacterial infections.’ This broad definition will lead to countless new AIDS diagnoses, whether or not the person actually has AIDS. A major problem with the new AIDS definition is that it ignores the many environmental causes of immune suppression. Exposure to toxins, alcoholism, heavy drug use or heavy antibiotic use all can cause onset of the list of ‘diseases’ indicative of AIDS. The CDC itself conceded in a stunning remark near the end of the JAMA article that the new AIDS ground rules are highly suspect. ‘The diagnostic criteria accepted by the AIDS surveillance case definition should not be interpreted as the standard of good medical practice,’ warned the CDC.”
Los Angeles Weekly, December 18, 1987

“The real trick is to get off the medication. I felt I was losing quality of life…”

Greg Louganis, HIV positive Olympic Gold Medalist,The State, April 15, 1997

“It’s not even probable, let alone scientifically proven, that HIV causes AIDS. If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There are no such documents.”

Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Laureate, HIV not Guilty, October 5, 1996

” If you think a virus is the cause of AIDS, do a control without it. To do a control is the first thing you teach undergraduates. But it hasn’t been done. The epidemiology of AIDS is a pile of anecdotal stories selected to the virus-AIDS hypothesis. People don’t bother to check the details of popular dogma or consensus views.”

Dr. Peter Duesberg, Do You Think HIV Causes AIDS?,Scientists for Legitimacy in Science, 1995

“Beware the scientist who believes that mainstream research thinking on any public health issue is equivalent to truth. Or the scientist who bullies or ridicules other scientists because they oppose the prevailing view. This is a person who has become what I would call a propagandist and should not be trusted.

“I have worked as a medical science reporter for 30 years. I’ve interviewed thousands of scientists for newspaper and magazine stories, radio and television productions, and books. I’ve met scientists who at least try to keep an open and fair mind on scientific issues. I have also met many propagandists who think they’re scientists. In all the time I’ve worked as a journalist, I’ve never come across a nastier group of people to interview than those propagandists who work in HIV research.”

Nicholas Regush, Medical Science Reporter, Second Opinion, ABCNews.com, September 29, 1999

“As a scientist who has studied AIDS for 16 years, I have determined that AIDS has little to do with science and is not even primarily a medical issue. AIDS is a sociological phenomenon held together by fear, creating a kind of medical McCarthyism that has transgressed and collapsed all the rules of science, and has imposed a brew of belief and pseudoscience on a vulnerable public.”

Dr. David Rasnick, Designer of Protease Inhibitors,SPIN magazine, June 1997

“Considering there is little scientific proof of the exact linkage of HIV and AIDS, is it ethical to prescribe AZT, a toxic chain terminator of DNA developed 30 years ago as cancer chemotherapy, to 150,000 Americans, among them pregnant women and newborn babies, as an anti-HIV drug?”

Rep. Gil Gutknecht (R-MN), US House of Representatives, Letter to NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, March 14, 1995

%d bloggers like this: