Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old March 6th, 2008 #1
Senior Member
Stronza's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,323
Default HIV causes "AIDS"

Well, there's terabytes available on this topic, but I think this page is the cutest.
“Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer.”
― Joseph Sobran
Old March 7th, 2008 #2
Martin Horvath...
Mad Hungarian
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 25
Martin Horvath

Originally Posted by Stronza View Post
Well, there's terabytes available on this topic, but I think this page is the cutest.
Behind the Holocaust it's the biggest scam currently being perpetuated. They even have a new class of hate speech they want to outlaw: "AIDS Denial".

Read the paper from 2003 by Duesberg entitled 'The Chemical Bases of the Various AIDS Epidemics'.
Old March 9th, 2008 #3
Alex Linder
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder

Good stuff, guys. The Duesberg files are fascinating.
Old March 27th, 2008 #4
Senior Member
Stronza's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,323

Another very good site for anti-Aidssters:
“Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer.”
― Joseph Sobran
Old April 23rd, 2008 #5
Senior Member
Stronza's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,323

April 23rd is Rethinking Aids Day!
“Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer.”
― Joseph Sobran
Old January 30th, 2009 #6
Larry Heinberg
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 615
Larry Heinberg

Well I don't think there's any argument here.

AIDS stands for "Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome".
Since the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) hijacks human immune cells to reproduce and destroys them in the process, it's pretty obvious that AIDS will result from HIV.

This knowledge comes from peer-reviewed research. So you'd better be sure you have a good argument before you dismiss it.
Old February 6th, 2009 #7
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1
Default Html

This is beautiful site where we share our romantic movement.

Old February 6th, 2009 #8
Genetically Wealthy
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 623

Here, smoke this:

Over 2,000 scientists, medical professionals, authors and academics are on record that the “Hiv-Aids” theories, routinely reported to the public as if they were facts, are dubious to say the least.

Information shown in red indicates recent additions.

“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.”

Spin Magazine, Vol. 10 No.4, 1994

“The HIV-causes-AIDS theory is one hell of a mistake.”

Foreword, “Inventing the AIDS Virus”

“Years from now, people will find our acceptance of the HIV theory of AIDS as silly as we find those who excommunicated Galileo.”

“Dancing Naked in the Mind Field,” 1998

“Where is the research that says HIV is the cause of AIDS? There are 10,000 people in the world now who specialize in HIV. None has any interest in the possibility HIV doesn’t cause AIDS because if it doesn’t, their expertise is useless.”

“People keep asking me, ‘You mean you don’t believe that HIV causes AIDS?’ And I say, ‘Whether I believe it or not is irrelevant! I have no scientific evidence for it.’ I might believe in God, and He could have told me in a dream that HIV causes AIDS. But I wouldn’t stand up in front of scientists and say, ‘I believe HIV causes AIDS because God told me.’ I’d say, ‘I have papers here in hand and experiments that have been done that can be demonstrated to others.’ It’s not what somebody believes, it’s experimental proof that counts. And those guys don’t have that.”

California Monthly, Sept 1994

“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.”

HIV not Guilty, Oct 5, 1996

“[Aids] is not ‘God’s wrath’ or any other absurdity. A segment of our society was experimenting with their lifestyle, and it didn’t work. They got sick. Another segment of our pluralistic society, call them doctor/scientist refugees from the failed War on Cancer, or just call them professional jackals, discovered that it did work. It worked for them. They are still making payments on their new BMWs out of your pocket.”

Dancing Naked in the Mind Field. Vintage Books. 2000

— Dr. Kary Mullis, PhD, Biochemist, Winner, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for inventing the polymerase chain reaction, the basis for the HIV viral load tests.

“The HIV hypothesis of AIDS is the biggest scientific, medical blunder of the 20th Century. The evidence is overwhelming that AIDS is not contagious, sexually transmitted, or caused by HIV. The physicians who know or suspect the truth are embarrassed or afraid to admit that the HIV tests are absurd and should be outlawed, and that the anti-HIV drugs are injuring and killing people.”

Mail & Guardian, Johannesburg, SA, Jan 24, 2001

“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.”

Spin, June 1997

“Fifty percent of Africans have no sewage systems. Their drinking water mixes with animal and human waste. They have constant TB and malaria infections, the symptoms of which are diarrhea and weight loss, the very same criteria UNAIDS and the World Health Organization use to diagnose AIDS in Africa. These people need clean drinking water and treated mosquito nets [mosquitoes carry malaria], not condoms and lectures and deadly pharmaceuticals forced on pregnant mothers.”

Scheff, AIDS Debate, Boston Dig, 2003

“We’ve put 20 years and $118 billion into HIV. We’ve got no cure, no vaccine and no progress. Instead we have thousands of people made sick and even killed by toxic AIDS drugs. But we can’t just treat them for the diseases we know they have because if we do, we’re called ‘AIDS denialists.’ AIDS is a multi-billion dollar industry. There are 100,000 professional AIDS researchers in this country. It’s as hard to challenge as big tobacco at this point.”


“Those damn [HIV] tests should be outlawed. They’re lethal. First of all, it’s a death sentence in South Africa. People commit suicide, they’ve been stoned to death, they’ve had their houses burned down, they’ve been murdered. Just for having antibodies to HIV. They have been ostracized. And in certain rural communities, ostracism is equivalent to death. So you’re scared to death, first of all. And then you start taking the anti-HIV drugs, which cause AIDS, and if you take them long enough they will kill you.”

New York Press, vol. 14, no. 16, 2002

“In 1990 at the San Francisco AIDS conference, [HIV co-discoverer Luc] Montagnier announced that HIV did not, after all, kill T-cells and could not be the cause of AIDS. Within hours of making this announcement, he was attacked by the very industry he’d helped to create.”


“People can have a high viral load and be healthy and have a low viral load and be sick and everything in between. These guys [AIDS researchers] will admit this between themselves, they just don’t admit it publicly.”

Gear Magazine, March 2000

“The National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, the Medical Research Council, and the World Health Organization are terrorizing hundreds of millions of people around the world by their reckless and absurd policy of equating sex with death. Linking sex to death has put these organizations in an impossible situation. It would be intolerably embarrassing for them to admit at this late date that they are wrong, that AIDS is not sexually transmitted. Such an admission could very well destroy these organizations or at the very least put their future credibility in jeopardy. Self preservation compels these institutions to not only maintain but to actually compound their errors, which adds to the fear, suffering, and misery of the world — the antithesis of their reason for being.”

British Medical Journal Rapid Response, 18 April 2003

— Dr. David Rasnick, PhD, Biochemist, Protease Inhibitor Developer, University of California

“The HIV-causes-AIDS dogma is the grandest fraud that has ever been perpetrated on young men and women of the Western world. AIDS is a cruel deception that is maintained because so many people are making money from it. Take away this money and the entire system of mythology will collapse.”

Sunday Times, London, 3 April 1994

“I think that Duesberg and Root-Bernstein have it right [about what causes AIDS]. Anything or process that destroys the individual’s ability to mount an immune response…This could be the use of…cocaine, heroin, amyl nitrite (poppers), amphetamines...malnutrition and lack of essential vitamins…being the recipient of whole blood or blood products…repeated and multiple infections… [all] are immunosuppressive.”

“Kimberly Bergalis, according to the general press, was a young lady who was found to have antibody to HIV…she was put on AZT [AIDS medicine]…the AZT killed her.”

“Ryan White was an 18-year-old hemophiliac who died in April of 1990 of unstoppable internal bleeding which may have been exacerbated by the AZT he was taking.”

“…Even after many years not one [HIV-infected] chimp has come down with AIDS diseases. This means we have an animal model for HIV, and it does not seem to cause AIDS.”

“…By the most sensitive PCR and culture procedures, no virus can be detected in 90% of the semen samples taken from men with AIDS.”

Rethinking AIDS May 1993

“The reason that the whole shabby story of HIV is being held in place is there’s so much money riding on it. The federal government is spending about $4 billion on just this single subject, and all that $4 billion is predicated on the idea that HIV causes these diseases. If HIV does not cause these diseases, then that money is being wasted. And I believe it is being wasted. But the people who are the recipients of that money don’t want it to stop.”

“I often wonder what would happen if all federal money for AIDS—education, research, treatment, and so forth—was suddenly dropped to zero. It’s my belief that AIDS would go away. In other words, the AIDS diseases that we see today would be reassigned to their former categories—pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, Kaposi’s sarcoma, and the other 25 or so different diseases, now including cervical dysplasia and so forth. AIDS has been a disease of definition. If we said that it didn’t exist and didn’t pay for it with taxpayers’ money, it would disappear into the background of normal mortality.”

Penthouse Magazine, April 1995

“Sex is no more dangerous today than 20 years ago—or 1,000 years ago.”

Rethinking AIDS May 1993

— Dr. Charles Thomas, PhD, former Professor of Biochemistry, Harvard and Johns Hopkins Universities. Former chair of the Cell Biology Department, Scripps Research Institute

“I do not believe that HIV, in and of itself, can cause AIDS.”

New York Daily News Sep 20, 1993

“The assumption was made in 1984 that HIV caused AIDS and this has scarcely been challenged since. We don’t really know if HIV causes AIDS, nor have we seriously tried to find out.”, Nov. 1991

“It will surely lead to a scientifically healthier society if the burden of proof for HIV as a deadly pathogen is returned to where it belongs — to those who maintain that HIV causes AIDS — and others are allowed to pursue alternative approaches in the battle for eradication of the disease.”

Nature, 20 April 1989

— Dr. Beverly E. Griffin, PhD, Director, Department of Virology, Royal Postgraduate Medical School, London

“HIV tests are meaningless. A person can react positive even though he or she is not infected with HIV. The tests are interpreted differently in different countries, which means that a person who is positive in Africa [or Thailand] can be negative when tested in Australia. There is no justification for the fact that most people have not been informed about the serious inaccuracy of the tests. The error has catastrophic repercussions on thousands of people. Since people are reacting positive on tests that are not specific for HIV, let’s please stop labeling them as ‘HIV positive.’”

Continuum Magazine, Mid-Winter 1999

“There are many scientific facts which show that the so-called human immunodeficiency virus (‘HIV’) does not fulfil the epidemiological and biological requirements, nor the common sense requirements, to be the cause of the human immunodeficiency syndrome.”

Continuum, Spring 1998

“The transmission of AIDS from person to person is a myth. The homosexual transmission of AIDS in Western countries, as well as the heterosexual transmission of AIDS in Africa and in other underdeveloped countries, is an assumption without any scientific validation.”, Sep. 2000

“None of the postulates on which the infectious hypothesis of AIDS is based fulfill the requirements of the research method. None of the bases of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis has been demonstrated at an objective level. They are theoretical assumptions, created by the minds of those who generate and defend that hypothesis.”

“Aids and Stressors,” 1997

— Dr. Roberto Giraldo, MD, specialist in internal medicine, infectious and tropical diseases, New York. Former Chairman of the Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia. Author, Aids and Stressors

“I would not be surprised if there were another cause of AIDS and even that HIV is not involved.”

Omni Magazine, June 1993

“Duesberg is absolutely correct in saying that no one has proven that AIDS is caused by the AIDS virus. And he is absolutely correct that the virus cultured in the laboratory may not be the cause of AIDS.”

Hippocrates Sept./Oct. 1988

— Dr. Walter Gilbert, PhD, Professor of Molecular Biology, Harvard University. Winner, 1980 Nobel Prize for chemistry

“Buried deep within the secretive and well-guarded dogma that Aids is a plague caused by the lethal virus known as HIV, there is a time bomb of potentially explosive contrary information.”

“The hypothesis that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS simply does not fit the clinical and epidemiological facts.”

Sunday Times, London, 7 June 1992

“There is no specific etiologic agent of AIDS. The disease arises as a result of a cumulative process following a period of exposure to multiple environmental factors...”

“Debating AZT,” 2000

“Nobody wants to look at the facts about this disease. It’s the most extraordinary thing I’ve ever seen. I’ve sent countless letters to medical journals pointing out the epidemiological discrepancies and they simply ignore them. The fact is, this whole heterosexual AIDS thing is a hoax.”

Spin June 1992

“AIDS is a behavioural disease. It is multifactorial, brought on by several simultaneous strains on the immune system — drugs, pharmaceutical and recreational, sexually transmitted diseases, multiple viral infections.”

Spin June 1992

“With the ‘discovery’ of HIV as the putative, universally infectious retrovirus and the conversion of this hypothesis into a dogma by the consensus, all dissent began to be suppressed by anonymous censorship, which became absolute, amazingly pervasive, and apparently immune from disclosure of conflicts of interests. On many occasions, I have been asked by the BBC and other networks to talk about AIDS only to find, at the last minute, that my appearance was canceled.”

“Colleagues and I attempting to publish have met an unholy alliance intent on rejecting any papers that offer serious criticisms of the orthodoxy. The mainstream journals and media — whenever they are presented with reasonable doubts about Aids — close ranks like regimented clams … There are, naturally, vested interests involved; many bodies and individuals receive high rewards for their work within orthodox AIDS science. Underlying much of this, the pharmaceutical companies have their own obvious agenda.”

Index on Censorship, UK, Issue 3, 1999

“It is a scandal that the major medical journals have maintained a conspiracy of silence over any dissent from the orthodox [HIV-AIDS] views and official handouts. At the same time, through their panic statements about everyone being at risk, health authorities spread undue alarm and anxiety among millions.”

Sunday Times, London, 7 June 1992

“The germ theory has become a dogma because it neglects the many other factors which have a part to play in deciding whether the host/germ/environment complex is to lead to infection. Among these are susceptibility, genetic constitution, behaviour, and socioeconomic determinants.”

‘Limitations of the Germ Theory’. Lancet. 1968 May 18

— Dr. Gordon Stewart, MD, Emeritus Professor of Public Health, University of Glasgow. Former Consultant Physician (Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine) to National Health Service (UK) and WHO. Author of over 100 journal articles and contributions to symposia, as well as such books as Trends in Epidemiology and The Penicillin Group of Drugs.

“While the experts, with their statistics, would have one believe that there exists an extremely serious HIV/AIDS epidemic [in Africa], no trace of an epidemic is observable in the field. All that can be seen is a very poor, under-nourished population suffering from malaria, endemic immunodeficiency and common illnesses.”

“The facts very clearly demonstrate that the endemic African immunodeficiency has nothing to do with a hypothetical ‘HIV,’ but is, rather, the result of malnutrition and its corollaries.”

“The so-called ‘HIV’ tests are unspecific; the positive results they may give are misleading and lead to the false belief in the existence of a viral epidemic. A positive test — and this applies especially to Africa — is not a sign of a specific viral infection. These so-called ‘HIV’ tests are deceptive, in that the positive results give the illusion that a precise diagnosis has been made.”

“And yet, it is these very same misleading [HIV test] results which constitute the basis of official statistics and which lead, first the experts, then the scientists, medical doctors, newspaper reporters, and finally the general public to believe that Africa is being ravaged by a specific viral infection called ‘HIV/AIDS!’ People speak of an epidemic of ‘HIV/AIDS,’ but the only thing which has the appearance of an epidemic is what I would call the ‘epidemic of tests,’ an artificial epidemic which is being actively promoted.”

“[The HIV tests] are also dangerous because they cause panic and stigmatization, they lead to the use of toxic anti-viral drugs and they draw attention away from the real sources of immune system deficiencies. Common sense and scientific reason dictate their abandonment.”

“For more than 15 years, the various scientific, medical and mass media alike have ceaselessly portrayed Africa as the continent caught in the grip of a new deadly sexually transmitted infection, and doomed to the most somber future imaginable. Yet, during this very same period, the population that was in the eye of the cyclone and received no specific treatment has continued to increase as before.”

“In 1985, the newly out ‘HIV’ tests detected the first HIV-positive individuals in precisely this same [Tanzania] border area…According to the experts, this region was doomed to be decimated, unless energetic measures were taken to combat this new deadly virus.

“Fifteen years later, we can begin to take stock of the situation. The following are official census results: For Tanzania, a regular upward curve can be observed for the period 1967 to 2002, with a [population] growth of 49% between 1988 and 2002. There is no drop in the population. For the Kagera region, we see the same upward curve, with 53% growth between 1988 and 2002.”

“…‘HIV’ tests were conducted [in Tanzania], but they led to the observation that sick children, whether ‘HIV’-positive or ‘HIV’-negative, recuperated equally well, so long as they received adequate nutrition and medical attention.”

“To state that the priority, with respect to emergency humanitarian aid, should be given to the fight against ‘HIV’ and to giving those countries the possibility of buying cheap-priced anti-viral products is just as irrational as saying to someone suffering from acute vitamin C deficiency, ‘Sir, I see that you are suffering from scurvy. You’d better go buy yourself some antibiotics and condoms.’”

December 8, 2003, address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels

— Dr. Marc Deru, MD, Visé, Belgium

“The gross figures about African AIDS were extrapolated to heavy degrees of exaggeration from small samples, thanks to interested publicists consciously running up the score. At a time (1980-2000) when AIDS was portrayed as decimating Africa, the population was actually increasing from 378 million to 652 million. Remember as well that people don’t die of AIDS per se but of other diseases attacking individuals made vulnerable by immune deficiencies whose principal cause, universally, is not HIV but nothing more mysterious than poor living conditions. The more selective precondition of AIDS can thus be posthumously assigned, presumptively.”

AIDS Reconsidered. 2006 Oct.

— Richard Kostelanetz, MA. Fulbright Scholar. Prolific writer, musician, videographer and artist.

“There are many people with AIDS but without HIV, and a great many people with HIV but without AIDS. These two facts mean that HIV=AIDS is much too simple. Plausible, alternative, testable causes of impairment of the immune system which may ultimately lead to AIDS should become part of regular AIDS research.”

Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994

— Dr. Henk Loman, PhD, Professor of Biophysical Chemistry at the Free University in Amsterdam.

“I am well convinced HIV is harmless.”

Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994

— Dr. Fabio Franci, MD, Specialist in Preventive Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Trieste, Italy

“I stopped going to AIDS meetings several years ago — I could no longer stand the stress of restraining myself from getting up and shouting, ‘Rubbish!’”

“From the outset I was never convinced that HIV had a role to play in AIDS, since the so-called evidence was unacceptable to me. However, I learned to keep my views to myself for a long time until I realized that there were many other ‘dissidents’ and doubters out there.”

“None of these investigators isolate actual viruses or viral genomes; all they do is add some primers to a PCR mixture and pretend that the printout represents HIV genomes. None of this has been proven, and furthermore the PCR technique was never conceived as a quantitative measure of anything. In view of this we should always qualify our usage of the term ‘viral load,’ otherwise we fall into the trap of subscribing to their hypothetical nonsense.”

“I do not believe there is an AIDS epidemic in Africa or Asia. People there are still dying from the combined effects of chronic infectious diseases plus malnutrition, poverty, and other factors, just as they always have.”

— Dr. James Hudson, PhD, Professor of Pathology and Medicine, University of British Columbia, Canada

“There are too many shortcomings in the theory that HIV causes all signs of AIDS. We are seeing people HIV-infected for 9, 10, 12 years or more, and they are still in good shape, their immune system is still good. It is unlikely that these people will come down with AIDS later.”

“HIV is neither necessary nor sufficient to cause AIDS.”

VI Int’l AIDS Conference, Jun 24 1990

“AIDS does not inevitably lead to death, especially if you suppress the co-factors that support the disease. It is very important to tell this to people who are infected.... I think we should put the same weight now on the co-factors as we have on HIV.”

“Psychological factors are critical in supporting immune function. If you suppress this psychological support by telling someone he’s condemned to die, your words alone will have condemned him.”

“We did not purify [isolate] ... We saw some particles but they did not have the morphology [shape] typical of retroviruses ... They were very different ... What we did not have, as I have always recognized it, is that it was truly the cause of AIDS.”

Interview with Djamel Tahi-1997

— Dr. Luc Montagnier, Virologist, co-discoverer of HIV, Pasteur Institute, Paris

“[Luc] Montagnier said clearly what he meant. HIV is a necessary but not, without the cofactor, a sufficient cause of AIDS.”

Nature 1992, 357:189

— John Maddox, Editor, Nature Magazine

“In 1994, (HIV co-discoverer) Robert Gallo quietly admitted that Kaposi’s Sarcoma (KS) — the major AIDS defining illness in gay men — could not be caused by HIV. But this was never reported in the mainstream press. Gallo told the audience of scientists and activists at the ‘94 NIDA meeting that HIV couldn’t cause KS and that he’d never even found it in T-cells, which HIV is supposed to kill. He said, ‘I don’t know if I made this point clear, but I think that everybody here knows — we never found HIV DNA in the tumor cells of KS. And, in fact, we’ve never found HIV DNA in T-cells. So in other words, we’ve never seen the role of HIV as transforming [cancer-causing] in any way.’”

“This was in complete opposition to everything Gallo had ever said about HIV or AIDS. But very few people paid attention to his retraction. The CDC ignored it, and continues to tell people KS is an AIDS disease. When Gallo was asked what, if not HIV, caused KS, he said, ‘The nitrites [poppers] could be the primary factor’ because ‘mutagenesis is the most important thing.’ It’s a very embarrassing situation for the AIDS establishment, and they’ve kept it quiet. One of the two hallmark diseases of AIDS is now clearly understood to be totally unrelated to AIDS or HIV.”

AIDS Debate, Boston Dig, 2003

— Liam Scheff, Journalist who exposed the forced drugging of orphans at the New York ‘Incarnation Children’s Center’

“[The evidence is] overwhelming that [Kaposi’s Sarcoma] is not caused by HIV.”

Spin, Nov 1994

— Dr. Marcus Conant, Clinical Professor of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco

“It’s clear that HIV alone can’t explain Kaposi’s [sarcoma]. There has to be something else.”

“The KS lesions are most common on the face, nose, and chest. If you are inhaling vapors, that is where you will have the highest concentrations. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see that there is some logic to the hypothesis [that gay men’s use of nitrites (‘poppers’) caused Kaposi’s Sarcoma]”

Spin, Nov 1994

— Dr. Harry Haverkos, Director of the AIDS office, US National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)

“Evidence is rapidly accumulating that the original theory of HIV is not correct.”

Sunday Times (London) 3 April 1994

“When Magic Johnson announced that he was infected by HIV, I wrote him a letter saying that assuming he didn’t have any other disease or condition that compromised his immune system, and assuming he didn’t take AZT, I would wager $10,000 that he would not die of AIDS. I advised Magic to un-retire and go back to playing in the N.B.A. He took that advice, although I’m sure it was not because I sent him a letter. I think it was highly unfortunate that he was forced to retire. I’m sure that there are any number of players in the N.B.A. who are HIV-positive, and none of them will get AIDS either, unless they have some other disease or condition which compromises their immune system.”

“There were people who felt that a single-virus theory would be very useful in helping to raise public awareness about the ‘disease.’ It would help them get the research they thought was necessary and public funding for its treatment by scaring people into believing that while the disease was affecting gay men now, it was eventually going to spread throughout the heterosexual population. This political definition of the disease has proven to be inaccurate and inconsistent with its real medical nature.”

Penthouse, April 1995

— Dr. Steven Jonas, MD, Professor of Preventive Medicine, State University of New York at Stony Brook

“AZT (anti-viral AIDS medicine) has, in countless cases, brought about the inevitable and slow asphyxiation of the patient’s body cells, and death by poisoning. The doctors wrongly diagnose the fatal consequences of AZT medication as AIDS following a prior HIV infection. Treatment with AZT and allied toxic substances may be equivalent to joining a suicide squad with a time fuse.”

Continuum, July/Aug. 1996

— Dr. Alfred Hassig, MD, Professor in Immunology, University of Bern, former Director Swiss Red Cross blood banks;
— Dr. Heinrich Kremer, MD, Germany
— Dr. Stefan Lanka, PhD, German virologist

“People with AIDS must learn that much of what they are told about AIDS is mere speculation, i.e. theories. The idea that the virus invades white blood cells, called T4 helper cells, and destroys them is one such theory. This theory and myth has been presented to the public as fact. The idea that a diminished number of T4 cells is the critical factor in the development of AIDS is another such theory. The idea that a number of T4 cells below 200 is the magic measure of whether a person should start taking AZT is a pig-in-the-poke choice of numbers.”

“In my own medical practice I have a few patients who have had less than 50 T4 helper cells for months and years and they haven’t become weakened or ill with serious infections. On the other hand, one patient who followed a natural therapy had a T4 increase from less than 100, to over 600, at which time he developed pneumocystis carinii pneumonia.”

“T4 white blood cell counts are intimately related to mental focus. One of my patients was without symptoms and went to another doctor for an ‘AIDS test.’ The doctor did the test, which was positive, as well as the T4 helper cell count, which was 494 and normal. Upon learning that his antibody test was positive, the patient went into a tailspin of depression and fear. One week later he returned to the doctor because of his anxiety, and his T4 helper cell count was taken again. After one week of depression and no other symptoms, his T4 cells count fell over 50% to 234.”

“This intimate relationship of the mind and body raises a question about the true nature of the AIDS epidemic. It is not far-fetched to postulate that much of the immune system depression among AIDS-test-positive patients might be the result of doctors telling them that it is likely they will get AIDS and die. The brain is a giant immune system gland that operates on hope, joy, and optimism. The gland turns off in response to mental attitudes of fear and depression.

“The question is raised as to how many people are dying because they have been programmed to die. The observation is made that doctors who tell their patients they have a terminal disease are programming their patients to die. The charge is made that these doctors are performing malpractice.”

— Dr. Lawrence Badgley, MD, San Francisco. Author, Healing Aids Naturally

“We are of the same opinion as Root-Bernstein that the decision taken at the time that HIV viruses are the sole decisive causative factor for AIDS considering the other risk factors as co-factors was rash and incorrect in retrospect. According to our opinion, it is the sum of the risk factors which causes a severe stress-induced deficiency of the T-cell related immune reactions.”

Swiss Journal of Holistic Medicine (Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Ganzheits Medizin) July 1995

— Dr. Alfred Hassig, MD, Professor in Immunology, University of Bern, former Director, Swiss Red Cross blood banks
— Prof. Wen-Xi Liang, MD;
— Dr. Kurt Stampfli, MD
— All from the Study Group on Nutrition and Immunity, Bern, Switzerland
— All from the Study Group on Nutrition and Immunity, Bern, Switzerland

“The first casualty of the ‘war on AIDS’ was the integrity of science. The exact moment of the crime can be pinpointed: it was the April, 1984 press conference where the then [US] Health Secretary Margaret Heckler declared that government scientist Robert C. Gallo had discovered the viral cause of AIDS. Heckler hailed the discovery as ‘yet another miracle for American medicine and science’ and a ‘victory over a dreaded disease.’ If smoke and mirror tricks are miracles, then miracle it was...Neither Gallo nor the [Pasteur] Institute proved that the virus was pathogenic. Indeed, they did not even isolate it, as the Pasteur Institute later admitted. But the spin-doctors at the National Institutes of Health had organized leading journals to endorse Secretary Heckler’s ‘miracle’ with the seal of Science. From that moment, all AIDS research and policy were based on a speculation converted to dogma by bureaucratic power.

“This initial public execution of scientific integrity unleashed a propaganda machine that expands Heckler’s initial obvious whopper (‘victory over a dreaded disease’) into a never-ending sickness saga that extorts money and grinds millions into the muck of bad medicine.

“Scientific integrity was murdered by a brutal health fascism. The next victim was the gold standard of clinical evaluation, the double blind trial. With a perversity that spin doctors must admire, the methodology was abandoned in the name of ethics! In reality, the double blind trial had to be murdered because it placed the treatment and causality dogmas of AIDS science at grave risk of falsification. The next victim was the integrity of independent clinical judgment. Any doctor who bucked the official line placed himself at risk of retaliation. And now, in the Tyson and Emerson cases, we see that the fundamental right of informed consent and right to refuse treatment were also murdered.”

“Be informed. Withdraw your consent from the most malignant fraud ever perpetrated in the name of medicine. Be aware that the primary truth in the ‘AIDS war’ is that powerful agencies have declared war on YOU and your loved ones, regardless of your HIV status. Be aware that ‘AIDS science’ is 90% mindless repetition and 10% deeply inconsistent findings of no clinical value.”

Coming to Grips with Health Fascism,, April 1999

— Dr. Hiram Caton, PhD, Ethicist, Head of the School of Applied Ethics at Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

“You do not want to give (AZT) to anyone, but especially to a baby, which is basically a mass of replicating DNA...I have an 8-year-old daughter, and I would never give her AZT - I would leave the state or country first.”

“It's terrible to tell a practicing doctor that his therapy is killing his patients...There’s almost no way to engage orthodox physicians in this debate because they go nuts on you.”

The Register-Guard (Eugene, Oregon). 29 Dec 1998

“I don't recommend people ever getting tested. The reason is I don’t know what the tests mean, and I think no one else knows what the tests mean. I’ve never seen any evidence that what these tests purport to show they’re actually showing -- namely, the presence of a virus, the presence of an exogenous virus. I really would like to see the electron microscopic data of this, and apparently there is none. There is none where you’ve done a rigorous isolation protocol.”

The Other Side of AIDS

— Robert De Prato, MD, US Dept. of Defense. Portland, Oregon

“When AIDS patients’ bodies finally break down from the effects of these anti-viral drugs, they say, ‘Now the virus has become resistant, and the drugs have lost their effectiveness.’ What really is happening is the toxicity of the drugs builds up to a point where the patient cannot stand it anymore. And, of course, they say it was the virus — rather than the entirely inevitable and predictable toxicity of these damned drugs.”

Reappraising AIDS Feb./March 1998

“Many Americans use amphetamines, diet drugs, cocaine and designer party drugs. When you do this for years, you start getting sick. You go to the doctor, who says the first thing you need is an HIV test. You test positive because HIV tests cross-react with antibodies produced by drug use. The doctor puts you on AZT, a DNA chain terminator, which, in high doses, will finish you off in six months. I’m not talking about a one-time use of a party drug. We’re designed to consume a lot of junk, but we’re not designed to tolerate a gram of cocaine, nitrite inhalants or heroin per day, and we’re even less capable of handling AZT.”


“This is my battle with John Maddox [editor of Nature] and with people who are actually fabricating the data [Ascher, et al in Nature, March 11, 1993]. They claim to have such a [Aids] group that had not used any drugs. When I analysed the data, it turned out that there was not a single person in their paper that was drug-free. I submitted a critique to Maddox, but his response was, I could no longer respond. I was censored.”

Spin, Sep 1993

“Look, the same virus wouldn’t cause Kaposi’s sarcoma in homosexuals, pneumonia in transplant recipients and ‘slim disease’ in Africa. The HIV theory doesn’t make sense. But we have a totally totalitarian science environment today. You have to become a government contractor to do research. And if you don’t concur with the government — with HIV, with Gallo — you don’t get any money. The fringes are growing, but the majority of researchers are conformists. We have a million PhD’s in this country, and they can’t all be Einsteins. Most of them are just good soldiers; they’ll do as they’re told.”

GQ Nov 1993

[On the AIDS establishment’s rejection of HIV co-discoverer Dr. Luc Montagnier when he said in 1990 that HIV alone cannot be the cause of AIDS]: “There was Montagnier, the Jesus of HIV, and they threw him out of the temple.”

Miami Herald 23 Dec 1990

“HIV is just a latent, and perfectly harmless, retrovirus that most but not all AIDS patients happen to carry. To say that HIV is the cause of AIDS is to cast aside everything we know about retroviruses...The HIV theory is inconsistent, paradoxical, and absurd...”

“The NIH is saying only experts understand AIDS. And who are they? They’re the people who have worked on HIV, whose careers are completely based on HIV, and worse than that, almost all of them have huge commercial interests associated with it. They have companies; they have patents; they make megabucks. It’s much more profitable than their university research. So, those are the judges. These people can afford to send you to Jupiter. But they cannot afford to give $50,000 to Peter Duesberg or somebody else with an alternative hypothesis, like the one to test for drugs as a cause of AIDS. To prove them wrong would mean that they would risk losing their good reputation and their standing in the scientific community as well as their companies.”

Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, June 2000

“Millions of lives that could have been saved won’t be saved if we work on an ungrounded or poorly grounded hypothesis.”

Meditel 1990

“…The point that everybody is missing is that all those original papers Gallo wrote on HIV have been found fraudulent. Well, then, that throws into question the entire HIV hypothesis, doesn’t it? The HIV hypothesis was based on those papers.”

Spin June 1992

— Dr. Peter Duesberg, PhD, Professor of Molecular Biology, University of California, member, National Academy of Sciences, first to map the genetic structure of retroviruses. Five-time recipient of the National Institutes of Health’s Outstanding Investigator Grant. (All federal grants terminated when he started challenging the HIV theory). Author, Inventing the AIDS Virus

“Peter Duesberg knows more about retroviruses than any man alive.”

Spin, June 1992

“…He doesn’t believe HIV causes the disease…I can’t win that debate. Rational people learn not to debate such things.”

NYU Medical Center, Interview with Robert Gallo by James M. Scutero Nov 11, 1993

“I think that if HIV is not being expressed and not reforming virus and replicating, the virus is a dud and won’t be causing the disease...”

Spin, Oct 1994

— Dr. Robert Gallo, co-discoverer of HIV

“If the papers that Duesberg cites are not misrepresented — and it is difficult to see how hundreds of papers could be misrepresented without the AIDS establishment coming down mercilessly on his misrepresentations — then his points are indeed compelling. For example: Why is the amount of HIV present in most AIDS patients so small that PCR amplification is required to demonstrate its presence? Why is AIDS in the US and Europe not random as it is in other viral epidemics? Why would HIV take 10 – 15 years from infection to AIDS? Why is the mortality of HIV-antibody positives treated with anti-HIV drugs higher than the untreated group? These and other troubling questions are answered with impeccable logic and references. Of course, the literature could have been abused to make a point, and I’m impressed that the full text of most of the papers cited in Duesberg’s 1992 review are now available though a hyperlink ( Anyone interested can make judgment.

One could only hope for a detailed point-by-point response from the establishment, but very little of substance has been forthcoming. Mainly, what have come from the AIDS establishment are ex-cathedra responses such as "the evidence is overwhelming." The book reminds us that although over $100 billion has been spent on AIDS research, not a single AIDS patient has been cured — a colossal failure with tragic consequences. It explains in too-clear terms the reasons why AIDS research focuses so single-mindedly on this lone hypothesis to the exclusion of all others: egos, prestige, and money. Mainstream virologists have assumed the power of the purse, and their self-interests (sometimes financial), propel them to suppress challenges. This is not an unusual story: challenges to mainstream views are consistently suppressed by mainstream scientists who have a stake in maintaining the status quo. It's not just Semmelweis and Galileo, but is happening broadly in today's scientific arena. Only now are the granting agencies beginning to face up to this serious problem.”

Review of Oncogenes, Aneuploidy, and AIDS: A Scientific Life and Times of Peter Duesberg by Harvey Bialy

— Gerald H. Pollack, PhD. Professor of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle. Author: Cells, Gels and the Engines of Life and Muscles and Molecules: Uncovering the Principles of Biological Motion

“For the past 20 plus years, like most other hospital based physicians working inside mainstream medicine, I accepted the HIV/AIDS hypothesis without question. The idea that HIV infected and killed T cells and therefore wiped out the immune system causing opportunistic infection was accepted by every one else, so I had no reason to question it. My major concern was avoiding a needle puncture from a patient whose HIV status was unknown. In retrospect, I admit I was vaguely aware of questions, but I didn’t know what those questions were or who posed them.”

“A few months ago, while surfing the internet for news, I came across a Google video entitled,” HIV/AIDS, Fact or Fraud?”, containing interviews with Dr. Peter Duesberg and Dr. Charles Thomas. The information seemed credible and sparked my curiosity, so I ordered the book, “Inventing the Aids Virus” by Peter Duesberg, as well as books by Farber, Bialy and Lauritson, and emailed Dr. Duesberg for more information. He quickly replied with a collection of more recent articles along with a sample of his appealing sense of humor. After weighing the arguments and style of the proponents of the two sides, I came away impressed with what seemed the higher moral and ethical standards of the AIDS rethinkers; their obviously much higher, scientific standards, and their inescapable, common sense credibility.”

“I have previously discussed Figure 3 of Rodriguez et al. (JAMA, Sept. 27, 2006), which shows an extremely poor, bordering on zero, correlation between CD4 cell numbers and HIV viral load. Today, I take a closer look at Figure 2 of the same article, which is reproduced below.

“There are 5 bar graphs showing median CD4 cell loss per year for each of 5 HIV viral load subgroups. Each chart shows a Gaussian distribution of the data. I have rearranged the parts of the figure to make it obvious that the location of the center bar for each of the five Gaussian distribution charts fall on a very straight line that screams: HIV is not the cause AIDS.

“The caption below the figure reads: ‘…to emphasize the slight increase in CD4 cell decline with increasing plasma HIV RNA levels’.

“The caption is misleading. There is no slight increase in CD4 decline. There is only a very negligible or no increase with increasing HIV load.

“If one wanted to present results showing that increasing HIV viral load numbers do not lead to the loss of CD4 cells (sometimes called AIDS), I cannot think of a better visual demonstration.

“W. Keith Henry MD in a JAMA editorial on p.1523 of the same issue writes: ‘These findings provide support to those who favor non-virological mechanisms as predominant causes of CD4 cell loss.’

“He also writes: ‘The seemingly useful practice of combining CD4 cell count and plasma HIV RNA levels to assess individual prognosis or response to HAART needs to be re-examined’...‘[the] sustainability of the current paradigm (anti-retroviral combo drugs) is at best questionable.’

“After 20+ years of HIV/AIDS research, JAMA finally agrees with Peter Duesberg.”

Barnesworld Blog

— Dr. Jeffrey Dach, MD, Medical Director of TrueMedMD. Board certified in interventional radiology and a member of the Board of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine. He retired from radiology in 2004, and is currently in private practice focusing on bio-identical hormone treatment.

“The case for a link between HIV and AIDS is not proven. I would like the ‘orthodox’ scientists to acknowledge that in Africa there are 29 or 30 diseases which may mimic AIDS, which are related to poverty. But they will not accept that because poverty does not make them big money but HIV makes them money. I would like them to acknowledge that most Africans who are said to be positive, if they were to move from Africa to Europe, to America or Australia, most of them, probably 80% would be negative…If we dissidents had only one hundredth of the funds that the orthodox view has, the orthodox view would probably be dead in less than a year.”

New African May, July-Aug. 2000

“I find it astonishing that with HIV/Aids you’re not allowed to ask questions, and the so-called dissident group is not allowed any publicity at all. I’m really concerned about the lack of democratic tendencies in the science establishments in South Africa.”

ANC Daily News Briefing, 22 March 2000

“Nutritional AIDS dominates the scene in South Africa today as indeed it did during Apartheid. In the middle [19]50’s and 60’s, 50 percent of black children were dead before the age of five. The causes of death were recorded as: Pneumonia, High Fever, Dehydration and intractable Diarrhea due to protein deficiency. Today, these clinical features are called AIDS. Today in South Africa, TB is the leading cause of death and morbidity amongst Africans, but this is called AIDS.”

December 8, 2003, address to European Parliament Conference on AIDS in Africa, Brussels

— Dr. Sam Mhlongo, MD, Head of the Department of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care at the Medical University of South Africa, Johannesburg.

“I was in Malawi and met with a group of women living with HIV. As I always do when I meet people with HIV/AIDS and other community groups, I asked them what their highest priority was. Their answer was clear and unanimous: food. Not care, not drugs for treatment, not relief from stigma, but food.”

“The first line of defence” in “World Food Program: Why food and nutrition matter in the fight against HIV/AIDS”. United Nations.

— Peter Piot, UNAIDS Executive Director

“The causal role of HIV in AIDS is certainly not proven.”

“Debating AZT,” 2000

“In 1988 the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR) convened a meeting in Washington, DC, which had the obvious purpose of silencing Peter Duesberg. A lot of questions occurred that I thought needed discussion. When I raised those questions at the meeting, I got the response you might expect from a bunch of fundamentalists confronted with someone who questioned the virgin birth. For example, Anthony Fauci [Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases] interrupted me at one point, in a rage, saying how could anyone doubt the compelling role of HIV, when there was this HIV-infected baby, who had never been exposed to other viruses, bacteria or drugs, and developed AIDS. Well, I had no answer. If I did, I couldn’t get up, he was so mad. Well, I later learned that the mother of that baby was an intravenous drug user who had all sorts of health and nutritional problems.”

“One of the things I want to point out is the tricky business of naming a virus. Naming something HIV, Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Avian Leukosis Virus, Avian Myelocytosis Virus — all of those names fix in the minds of those who use them, or work with them, that this is the proof.”

“…So I realized then I was dealing with a self-fulfilling prophecy. If there are HIV antibodies when you have Kaposi’s, then it’s AIDS, and if no antibodies…then it’s not AIDS, just Kaposi’s. No wonder there’s such a strong association between the virus and AIDS, if the diagnosis is based on the presence of the virus...”

Yale Scientific Vol. 68, 1994

“Who were these people who are so much wiser, so much smarter than Luc Montagnier? He became an outlaw as soon as he started saying that HIV might not be the only cause of AIDS.”

“The minute someone suggests that the orthodoxy might be wrong, the establishment starts to call him crazy or a quack. One week you’re a great scientist; the next week, you’re a jerk. Science has become the new church of America and is closing off all room for creative, productive dissent.”

Miami Herald, Dec 23, 1990

— Dr. Harry Rubin, DVM, Professor of Molecular Biology, University of California, Berkeley

“AIDS is a government-defined disease. The CDC and government-funded investigators accept as fact the supposition that ‘HIV causes AIDS and is sexually transmitted.’ This is not to be questioned. But this HIV-AIDS model does not jibe with the true facts of the matter. Only 1 in 1000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits HIV, and only 1 in 275 US citizens has antibodies to this virus. Consequently, the average uninfected person would need to have 275,000 random unprotected sexual contacts to acquire sexually transmitted HIV.”

“Another fact: According to this model, HIV triggers immunodeficiency…by getting into and killing T cells. T cells in the laboratory that are infected with HIV, however, don’t die. Laboratories grow HIV-infected T cells in test tubes, where they thrive, to produce the large quantities of the virus, which is used to detect antibodies to HIV in a person’s blood. This virus infects only 1 in every 500 T cells and is extremely hard to find in a person’s body. What one sees are the antibodies to the virus in the blood.”

“The HIV-AIDS model is untenable. The twenty-plus diseases the government defines as ‘AIDS’ (when antibodies to HIV are also present) are caused, instead, by immunosuppressive heavy-duty recreational drug use, antiretroviral drugs, and receptive anal intercourse. The elusive HIV, when present, simply goes along for the ride, lodged in a small minority of the body’s T cells. It is a passenger on the AIDS airplane, not its pilot.”

Letter to

“in 1987 Duesberg ran afoul of the establishment. He published a paper in Cancer Research titled "Retroviruses as Carcinogens and Pathogens: Expectations and Reality," followed a year later by one in Science, "HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS." Thereafter, Duesberg was subjected to the punishment now accorded modern-day heretics. The NIH ceased giving him grants (the NIH and other federal and state funding sources have rejected his last 21 consecutive research grant applications), colleagues labeled him "irresponsible and pernicious" (David Baltimore) and his work "absolute and total nonsense" (Robert Gallo), and graduate students at Berkeley were advised not to study with Duesberg if they wanted to go on and have a successful career in biology. He was branded a "rebel," a "maverick," an "iconoclast," and by one writer, in an article in Science in 1988 titled "A Rebel Without a Cause of AIDS," a "gadfly." Blocked from receiving grants, he obtained private funds to maintain his laboratory at UC Berkeley, and he now spends part of each year doing research in Germany. His principle work on HIV/AIDS is “Inventing the AIDS Virus”, published in 1996. In this book, and in other papers he has written on the subject, Duesberg systematically dismantles, piece by piece, the germ theory of AIDS. This theory/hypothesis has two parts: 1) HIV causes AIDS, and 2) HIV is sexually transmitted.

“When Duesberg’s work on HIV/AIDS and cancer is finally recognized and accepted, it will cause a revolution in science. Over the last 50 years government-sponsored and industry-sponsored research programs have come to dominate scientific research. A totalitarian system now exists where only scientists that adhere to the prevailing orthodoxy can receive funds to conduct research. Not only will the government not fund studies on alternative hypotheses for AIDS and cancer, but this stricture applies to other areas of inquiry.”

A Modern-Day Copernicus: Peter H. Duesberg

— Dr. Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD (Harvard, 1965), BMS (Dartmouth, 1963), Professor of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine. Author of The Practice of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery (1977), co-author of Atlas of Cardiac Surgery (1983, Japanese version 1985), author of Heart in Hand (1999).

“HIV does not cause AIDS. There is no scientific evidence that HIV can kill infected T4 cells. The true problem is that the leaders of the HIV hypothesis have been ignoring important medical facts and are blindly attributing AIDS to the HIV virus. It is very sad and frustrating to know that the AIDS establishment are giving highly toxic drugs such as AZT to pregnant women even with studies that show the depression in the immune system can be reversed by nutrition. Prescribing anti-viral drugs to AIDS patients is like putting gasoline on a fire.”, 2 May 2001

“…the results of the studies described above clearly show that the reductions in CD4+ T cell counts in homosexual patients have resulted from their treatment with glucocorticoid and not as the result of their HIV-infection. These studies provided clinical proof that HIV is a harmless virus and the HIV tests are worthless.”

BMJ RR, 5 February 2004

— Dr. Mohammad Ali Al-Bayati, PhD, Toxicologist and Pathologist, California. Author, Get all the facts: HIV does not cause AIDS.

“Dr. Al-Bayati convincingly demonstrates that the convergence of several factors other than HIV represent the true causes of AIDS.”, 2 May 2001

“The HIV hypothesis, a staunchly defended thesis among its proponents, assumes that AIDS is caused by an infectious retrovirus. The declaration that the chosen virus was indeed the cause of AIDS was accompanied by the naming of this virus as the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). Given this name, the HIV hypothesis suddenly became a self-fulfilling proposition and a classical example of the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.”

Foreword, “Get all the facts: HIV does not cause AIDS,” June 1999

— Dr. Otto Raabe, PhD, Professor and Director, Institute of Toxicology and Environmental Health, University of California, Davis

“Dr. Al-Bayati provides solid scientific support for the position that HIV does not cause AIDS. Exposure to steroids and the chemicals in our environment, the drugs used to treat AIDS, stress and poor nutrition are the real causes.” newsletter, July 11, 2001 Issue 236

“The truth is that AZT, ddI, ddC, protease inhibitors and other drugs termed ‘antiretrovirals’ have not been found in any controlled studies to show proven clinical benefits for HIV/AIDS patients. The only studies published that claim positive outcome were short-term and did not have statistically significant results.”

“Even more alarming, there is plenty of evidence that these drugs have been found to cause the very symptoms they are meant to cure. Over 500 MDs and/or PhDs have signed a statement calling for a reappraisal of the causes of AIDS, and questioning whether the symptoms are being caused by HIV.”

“What is not mentioned in any textbook is that AZT has been found in five studies performed after its rushed FDA approval to be equally toxic to T-cells, the very cells whose absence is blamed on HIV. This is not surprising since T-cells are produced in the bone marrow, and all the other cells produced there are depleted by AZT. These studies are but a sample of the evidence that suggest that AZT and other ‘antiretrovirals’…are causing a variety of AIDS-like symptoms which are being blamed on HIV.”

“Another fact that raises serious questions about the possibility of HIV causing disease is that even after some $45 billion dollars of research funds, scientists cannot figure out how it supposedly destroys T-cells. This is because it does not destroy T-cells in test tubes and has never been shown to destroy them in humans, either.”

“An immunologist from Harvard Medical School summed up the problem as follows: ‘We are still very confused about the mechanisms that lead to T-cell depletion, but at least now we are confused at a higher level of understanding.’ A simpler explanation of these problems, especially after $45 billion, is that HIV does not affect T-cells, at all.”, 1999

— Dr. Joseph Mercola, former Chairman of the Family Medicine department at St. Alexius Medical Center, Hoffman Estates, Illinois; served as editor of HIV Monograph by Abbott Laboratories published in 1989 and distributed to physicians nationally. Editor of, one of the top 10 health websites on the internet

“Large numbers of people are being inappropriately treated with [AIDS] drugs they don’t need. And their lives are probably being shortened.”

“It [Dr. David Ho’s ‘Hit Hard, Hit Early’ theory of HIV treatment—which earned him Time Magazine’s ‘Man of the Year’ award] was just unadulterated hype. It was preposterous. It was almost like an instantaneous religion, or a cult, right after Vancouver [AIDS conference]. You were either a part of that hit-hard-hit-early religion or you were not. It split the HIV community.”

“People don’t realize all the myriad ways that doctors benefit from the drug companies. For example, let’s say that drug company A likes the message that Dr. C is talking about, they can give a research grant to Dr. C and because it’s listed as a ‘research grant,’ people will say, ‘Oh well, this is above board,’ when in fact it’s nothing more than a glorified under-the-table payment. Now, let’s say that you are Dr. C, and you have a $250,000 research grant from company A. What is the likelihood that you are going to say anything bad about their drugs? Zero. At best you are going to say nothing.”

“Just go to the U.S. Public Health Service web site. Under federal law they have to disclose who they have taken money from. It’s right there. Some of these doctors have taken money from 15 to 20 different companies. If 20 companies that are in the business of making money for drug treatment are giving you money, can you honestly stand up and say, ‘Don’t treat?’”

Gear Magazine March 2000

— Dr. Stephen Miles, AIDS specialist, University of California Medical Center, Los Angeles

“The marketing of HIV as a killer virus causing AIDS without the need for any other factors has so distorted research and treatment that it may have caused thousands of people to suffer and die.”

Sunday Times (London) 17 May 1992

“Gallo was certainly committing open and blatant scientific fraud. But the point is not to focus on Gallo. It’s us — all of us in the scientific community, we let him get away with it…nobody would say a word against Gallo. It had a lot to do with patriotism — the idea that this great discovery was made by an American.”

“The AIDS Medical Foundation was sending out this press release saying that nobody is safe, everybody is going to get it — and all that. When I heard this, I totally freaked out. It was all just nonsense. I called them up and said, ‘Do you know what’s going to happen as a result of what you are doing? You’re going to freak out heterosexual men, you’re going to destroy relationships, marriages…you’re going to promote violence against gay men…All of which has come true.”

“I couldn’t fight Terry [AmFAR’s then public relations director] He was very determined…He knew that this heterosexual AIDS thing was a hoax, but he said have to do it to raise money. And certainly, you could argue that unless those heterosexual male politicians in Washington thought that sex could kill, they weren’t going to release any money…The money was raised to protect heterosexual men from a disease they’re not going to get anyway. So what have these hundreds of millions of research dollars given us? Nothing. AIDS education? All I see is terror and confusion. And AZT, which is a disaster.”

Spin June 1992

“Of course it’s wrong [Dr. David Ho’s math for his proposed ‘eradication’ of HIV]. Everybody knows that. It’s such way-out bullshit. The notion of ‘eradication’ is just total science fiction. Every retrovirologist knows this. The RNA of retroviruses turns into DNA and becomes part of us. It’s part of our being. You can’t ever get rid of it.”

“Yes, [Dr. David Ho] is a fraud, if a fraud means mediocre interpretations of the dynamics of T-cell changes in response to therapy. But, then, who is the fraud? Anybody is capable of having stupid ideas, but what’s unusual is getting them onto the front page of the New York Times and Time. The real villains are the journalists, in my opinion. We have traditionally depended on the press to protect us from nonsense like this — not anymore.”

Gear, March 2000

“I’m totally ashamed of the profession. We have all these potent drugs but we don’t know how to use them. If we were a sane society, we would find out. This is not evidence-based medicine. This is just a disgusting manipulation of people’s fears and desperation, all for the sake of selling drugs.”

Spin, April, 1997

“We live in a media age that loves sound bites and simple quotes. HIV is simple, whereas the multifactorial model [of AIDS] is very complex. People don’t want to take the time to understand.”

Spin, April 1991

— Dr. Joseph Sonnabend, MD, New York Physician, founder of the American Foundation for AIDS Research (AmFAR)

“I received my PhD in 2002 for my work constructing mathematical models of HIV infection, a field of study I entered in 1996.”

“My work as a mathematical biologist has been built in large part on the paradigm that HIV causes AIDS, and I have since come to realize that there is good evidence that the entire basis for this theory is wrong. AIDS, it seems, is not a disease so much as a sociopolitical construct that few people understand and even fewer question...”

“Why have we as a society been so quick to accept a theory for which so little solid evidence exists? Why do we take proclamations by government institutions like the NIH and the CDC, via newscasters and talk show hosts, entirely on faith? The average citizen has no idea how weak the connection really is between HIV and AIDS, and this is the manner in which scientifically insupportable phrases like ‘the AIDS virus’ or ‘an AIDS test’ have become part of the common vernacular despite no evidence for their accuracy.”

“Over the past ten years, my attitude toward HIV and AIDS has undergone a dramatic shift. This shift was catalyzed by the work I did as a graduate student, analyzing mathematical models of HIV and the immune system. As a mathematician, I found virtually every model I studied to be unrealistic. The biological assumptions on which the models were based varied from author to author, and this made no sense to me...”

“Enough is enough, and I can no longer in any capacity continue to support the paradigm on which my entire career has been built.”

“…But few people know that the criteria for a positive WB [Western Blot HIV test] vary from country to country and even from lab to lab. Put bluntly, a person’s HIV status could well change depending on the testing venue. It is also possible to test ‘WB indeterminate,’ which translates to any one of ‘uninfected,’ ‘possibly infected,’ or even, absurdly, ‘partly infected’ under the current interpretation. This conundrum is confounded by the fact that the proteins comprising the different reactive ‘bands’ on the WB test are all claimed to be specific to HIV, raising the question of how a truly uninfected individual could possess antibodies to even one ‘HIV-specific’ protein.”

“I have come to sincerely believe that these HIV tests do immeasurably more harm than good, due to their astounding lack of specificity and standardization...I cannot buy the idea that any individual needs to have a diagnostic HIV test. A negative test may not be accurate (whatever that means), but a positive one can create utter havoc and destruction in a person’s life – all for a virus that most likely does absolutely nothing. I do not feel it is going too far to say that these tests ought to be banned for diagnostic purposes.”

“The real victims in this mess are those whose lives are turned upside-down by the stigma of an HIV diagnosis…People have lost their jobs, been denied entry into the Armed Forces, been refused residency in and even entry into some countries, even been charged with assault or murder for having consensual sex; babies have been taken from their mothers and had toxic medications forced down their throats. There is no precedent for this type of behavior, as it is all in the name of a completely unproven, fundamentally flawed hypothesis, on the basis of highly suspect, indirect tests for supposed infection with an allegedly deadly virus – a virus that has never been observed to do much of anything.”

“Suffice it to say that the HIV hypothesis of AIDS has offered nothing but predictions – of its spread, of the availability of a vaccine, of a forthcoming animal model, and so on – that have not materialized, and it has not saved a single life.”

“After ten years involved in the academic side of HIV research, as well as in the academic world at large, I truly believe that the blame for the universal, unconditional, faith-based acceptance of such a flawed theory falls squarely on the shoulders of those among us who have actively endorsed a completely unproven hypothesis in the interests of furthering our careers…”

“For over twenty years, the general public has been greatly misled and ill-informed. As someone who has been raised by parents who taught me from a young age never to believe anything just because ‘everyone else accepts it to be true,’ I can no longer just sit by and do nothing, thereby contributing to this craziness. And the craziness has gone on long enough. As humans – as honest academics and scientists – the only thing we can do is allow the truth to come to light.”

Why I Quit HIV

— Rebecca Veronica Culshaw, PhD. Assistant Professor of Mathematics, University of Texas at Tyler. Advisor, Journal of Biological Systems. Studied and published mathematical models of HIV infection for 10 years.

“Every mathematician knows that by changing the definition of something, you can change the entire truth about that thing. Rebecca Culshaw describes how the HIV = AIDS ‘orthodoxists’ have abused this idea. As in a shell game, they keep moving the definitions around, so that anything can be true and everyone will be confused. The abuse of science that has been documented here is itself very frightening. But when we learn that the standard treatment for HIV-positives – antiviral therapy – will substantially increase their risk of dying, it’s even scarier.”

Editorial review at Science Sold Out: Does HIV Really Cause AIDS?: Rebecca Culshaw, Harvey Bialy: Books Science Sold Out: Does HIV Really Cause AIDS?: Rebecca Culshaw, Harvey Bialy: Books

— Dan Fendel, B.A. (summa cum laude) Harvard University, PhD, Yale; Professor of Mathematics, San Francisco State University; Primary author, Foundations of Higher Mathematics: Exploration and Proof.

“No evidence of female prostitutes transmitting HIV or AIDS into the heterosexual community exists for any Western nation. Acquisition of HIV by men from female prostitutes is almost always drug related. In fact, sexual acquisition of HIV and AIDS among female prostitutes themselves is almost unknown in the absence of concomitant intravenous drug use.”

“The almost complete absence of HIV among non-drug using prostitutes is not due to safer sex practices. The same studies that found an absence of HIV documented low rates of condom use and very high rates of infection with classical sexually transmitted diseases.”

“…Thus, healthy individuals do not contract HIV or AIDS, and even HIV seropositive, drug-abusing female prostitutes have not been and cannot be vectors for transmitting HIV or AIDS to a healthy, drug-free heterosexual population.”

Rethinking AIDS March 1993

“Consider, for example, the immunologic risks of blood transfusion patients. It is often said that their only risk of AIDS is HIV. But they would not need a blood transfusion unless they were already at death’s door. The blood that they receive itself suppresses their immune systems; the greater the amount of blood transfused, the greater the immunosuppression.”

“Drug addicts have many more immunologic risks than simply HIV acquired from shared needles. The drugs they use often suppress the immune system. Most addicts are concurrently infected with a variety of viruses, including hepatitis viruses; bacteria; and recurrent sexually transmitted diseases. The majority chronically abuse antibiotics and are therefore much more likely…to acquire drug resistant strains of infections, such as tuberculosis. Most have autoimmune conditions in which their antibodies target their white blood cells. Most are malnourished, some severely so, and do not have the nutrients required to mount an effective immune response... AIDS, in short, is more than just HIV.”

Wall Street Journal 17 March 1993

“Every AIDS patient has multiple causes of immune suppression other than HIV, many of which precede HIV infection and some of which occur in the total absence of HIV. The existence of these largely unrecognized immunosuppressive agents in AIDS not only requires a rethinking of the definition of the syndrome as occurring mainly in people without previously identified causes of immune suppression but also necessitates a critical look at the role of HIV as a causative agent in AIDS.”

The Evolving Definition Of Aids, Rethinking AIDS

“What, then, is the role of HIV? The only way to explain these [HIV-free AIDS] cases is that the people have other high-risk factors associated with AIDS, such as malnutrition, multiple infections, exposure to symptoms, and drug use…[These factors can] cause the same immune suppression…that everyone says HIV causes.”

“Those people who have had the HIV infection for ten or 15 years now or who have survived full-blown AIDS for five or ten years have not used AZT for more than a week or two because they found the side effects to be so bad. Most of them never used any of these drugs at all. This suggests that survivors don’t use anything that can cause immune suppression. They eliminate drugs, including antibiotics and AZT, and simply try to lead a healthy lifestyle. So they may have the HIV infection, but it doesn’t do anything to them.”

Penthouse April 1994

“…We thought we knew that HIV always precedes immune suppression in people who develop AIDS. But many studies show that lymphocyte counts are as low in some HIV-negative gay men, intravenous drug users, and hemophiliacs as they are in non-symptomatic HIV-positive people—and sometimes lower.”

The Scientist 4 April 1994

— Dr. Robert Root-Bernstein, PhD, Professor of Physiology, Michigan State University

“We do not know the pathogenesis of this disease. And we were very early forced into a very dogmatic view: namely, that somehow HIV kills the T-cells.”

Spin April 1991

“I was very upset…The cause of AIDS was discovered by government fiat...I had been working with the Pasteur Institute for six months, but then that [Gallo] announcement was made at the press conference. As far as I’m concerned, from that point on AIDS research turned into seedy, criminal politics, and it remained that way.”

Spin, June, 1992

“I was far from convinced by the data they had then and I’m still not convinced. We were all forced into a very dogmatic and simplistic view of what caused AIDS. Today, I think even the greatest proponents of HIV no longer believe that it does all that damage to the immune system by itself. There have to be other factors involved. And because of the HIV hypothesis, there’s been little or no research done on what those other factors may be.”

Spin June 1992

“I personally do not prescribe AZT unless a patient insists. I have continued to find that patients survive longer without it.”

Spin, April 1991

— Dr. Michael Lange, MD, Head of AIDS Programme, St. Lukes Hospital, New York

“... I was going through an old copy of ‘Nature’ and found a challenge to the Fauci ‘massive infection’ of lymph nodes paper, the one usually cited by the more sophisticated scientists as ‘proving’ HIV causes AIDS. Three Berkeley scientists (Sheppard, Ascher, Krowka; Nature 364:291 22 July 93) politely demolish the claims of the article.

“My favorite sentence in Fauci's response was:

‘[T]he persistence of a replicating virus could trigger a complex series of immunopathogenic events even involving uninfected cells, which could account for the progressive deterioration of the immune system.’

“One might add that this theory is now so flexible that it can explain anything.”

“I think, at bottom, the HIV hypothesis is *A BORING FAILURE* and we need something better.”

Rethinking Aids, 28 Feb 1994

— Scott R. King, MA, Chemistry, Harvard University. Phi Beta Kappa, University of Chicago, 1977. Awarded National Science Foundation Fellowship, 1977. President and Director, Hanuman Medical LLC, PlasmaSeal LLC, and Cerco Medical LLC. San Francisco, California

“I have a large population of [HIV + patients] who have chosen not to take any anti-retroviral [drugs]. They’ve watched all of their friends go on the anti-viral bandwagon and die.”

“Lecture to Medical Students,” Synapse, 1996

“I have been one of the people who’s questioned, from the beginning, whether or not we’re really making an impact with HIV drugs and, if we are making an impact, if it’s going in the right direction.”

Continuum, Nov/Dec 1996

— Dr. Donald Abrams, MD, Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco; Director of AIDS Program, San Francisco General Hospital

“HIV does not kill cells in culture, it transmits sexually and parenterally only with great difficulty, it is present only in trace concentrations in the average AIDS patient. Furthermore, AIDS occurs even in HIV-negative individuals. The eradication of HIV by antiviral medication fails to alter the ultimate progression of the syndrome. For these and other reasons, many scientists now doubt the HIV theory and propose instead a non-contagious, multifactorial causation similar to that seen in cancer and heart disease.”

“Although the majority of hemophiliacs have been exposed to HIV through the use of blood products, only 67 out of about 17,000 hemophiliacs have ever developed AIDS. This is not a statistic that compels one to conclude that HIV is a major etiological factor in this syndrome. Also, among treated hemophiliacs, the degree of immune system abnormalities remains the same regardless of whether they are seropositive or seronegative for HIV.”

Medical Hypotheses, 1998, 50, 67-80

“When a whole classroom is exposed to streptococcus, why is it that only some children develop strep throat? If a hundred people are infected with hepatitis C virus, why is it that only a fraction of them actually develop a disease from it? The answer clearly lies in the function of the host’s response. Would it not be more rational to suggest that strep throat and hepatitis C are not caused by their associated microbes, but rather by a deficient host response?”

“AIDS is a similar phenomenon. While it seems highly likely that HIV is a significant factor in the disease, the aquisition and course of the disease is much more a function of the host’s immune function than it is of HIV. Thus a cure is impossible when therapy simply focuses on killing HIV, because such an approach fails to address the real reason for the disease, which is a constellation of factors resulting in immune system dysfunction. Indeed, many anti-HIV therapies used today are actually known to further impair immune system function, and theoretically destroy all chances of a cure. HIV is not the cause of AIDS, although it does appear to be a factor.”

Letter to, January, 2003

— Dr. Frank Shallenberger, MD, former professor, University of California School of Medicine at Davis and John F. Kennedy University in Orinda, California; Secretary, Orthomolecular Medical Society; Medical Board of Directors, Huxley Institute for Biosocial Research; Founding Director of the International Bio-Oxidative Medicine Foundation

“A campaign has been conducted to program us into believing that HIV is a deadly, infectious virus that inevitably results in AIDS and death. And we have been continually told that while no cure exists, antiviral drugs will slow down the progression of the disease. Despite evidence to the contrary, the general public continues to buy these ideas. They are the only ones reported. The fact is, there have always been people questioning or disagreeing with the official theory and treatment approach, but they have been silenced.”

Penthouse, Nov, Dec, 1995

“No one, I repeat, no one under ANY circumstances should have the HIV test. It is a fraud. A complete and total fraud. And I defy any doctor, any scientist in this audience, to prove me wrong. Cross-reactions with non-HIV antibodies [false positives] have been documented in the presence of flu virus, common cold virus, herpes simplex 2, Hepatitis B, tuberculosis, leprosy, flu and hepatitis vaccines, pregnancy, blood transfusions, blood-clotting factor, [rectally deposited] sperm, [recreational] drug use, auto-immune diseases like lupus, arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis.”

“What do you think goes on in a person’s mind when they’re suddenly told that they have HIV, when in fact, you’re never tested for a virus. That’s not humanly possible, because no one to date has ever isolated the HIV virus. Well, think of what you would do when you went home. Your immune system would go right through the floor. You’d be depressed, you’d be anxious. You’d be terrified. You’d be paranoid.”

“Think of what would happen when you had to start telling everyone in your life that you had HIV. Your doctor would immediately…put you on the most toxic chemotherapies known. Chemotherapies that in a healthy individual will KILL you, will create the very symptoms that we’re calling AIDS. Five, six times a day you keep giving it chemotherapy. But you don’t give it chemotherapy for a month as some people with cancer have, or even two months. You have to take it every day for the rest of your life. And then, what had been a completely healthy, normal person now is dying. And they’re suffering from an iatrogenic, drug-induced, doctor-induced death.”

“There was no virus there. There was not even an antibody to the virus. [The test] was cross-reacting. Yep. And yet we still allow the fraud of AIDS research to continue on, where 100,000 scientists are bilking the American public for more money each year than is spent on cancer or heart disease.”

Natural Living, WBAI Radio, 3/21/96

— Dr. Gary Null, PhD, syndicated host of Natural Living with Gary Null, author (AIDS, A Second Opinion), and a producer of PBS special programs. His Deconstructing the Myth of AIDS won the Audience Award for Best Documentary at both the New York and Los Angeles International Independent Film and Video Festivals.

“It is time to reexamine our commitment and the traditional approach taken thus far in dealing with [AIDS]. Gary Null asks tough questions and comes up with truly thought provoking answers. Have we all been taken in once again by Corporate America? Who has been profiting and who has been losing so far in the handling of the AIDS crisis?”

“Aids, A Second Opinion”

— Susan Sarandon, Actress, Activist

“[Gary] Null and co-author James Feast do us a service in giving voice to the point of view of AIDS dissidents such as Nobel laureates Drs. Mullis and Gilbert, as well as Professors Strohman and Rasnick, and the many others cited in the book [AIDS: A Second Opinion]. One has to wonder, why hasn’t their collective challenge to the ‘HIV equals AIDS equals death’ paradigm been given more publicity? These are credentialed people, and there certainly is, as this book shows, reasonableness to their claims.”

“I myself have had three patients with advanced AIDS and substantially debilitated health who then undertook various natural protocols and improved their overall immune function significantly. So why wouldn’t I want to explore alternative approaches to this condition? Why wouldn’t I want to review as many scientific references as possible that support these approaches? I am happy to have a book on hand that goes beyond the party line of those who run the war on AIDS, looks at alternative perspectives, and provides extensive documentation to support them.

“Furthermore, I plan to make this book required reading for all of the persons I counsel with AIDS-defining illnesses. And I would recommend it to every concerned and conscientious physician, nurse, and public health advocate in the country.”

Review of “Aids, A Second Opinion,”, June 18, 2002

— Dr. Martin Feldman, MD, Assistant Clinical Professor of Neurology at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, graduate of Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons, author of more than 50 articles published in peer-reviewed medical journals

“An intrinsic cytopathic [cell-harming] effect of the virus is no longer credible.”

Nature, 12 Jan 1995

“...HIV is behaving more and more like a virus, without frills or special effects.”

— Dr. Simon Wain-Hobson, Pasteur Institute, Paris

“HIV=AIDS=DEATH is a gross error. The medical community is providing deadly drugs to positive HIV patients, that will cause certain death to them. Then, the myth will be played on, with the doctor reporting that they died from AIDS, not from the complications of these deadly drugs. The madness must stop.”

“I personally have lost too many friends who did not become ill and die until they began their regimen of anti-HIV medicines.”

“You start out with a testing system that is riddled with false positives, then you treat them with lethal medications which impair the immune system, and then say ha ha you have an immune damaging disease called AIDS...”

Virusmyth webboard

— Dr. Craig Michael Uhl, MD, former U.S. Navy physician, California

“I’m not saying that it is impossible for unprotected vaginal intercourse to transmit HIV from a positive to a healthy adult negative partner. Anything’s possible. It’s possible to be struck by lightning. But the two risks share an analogous probability, effectively zero. If healthy, HIV-negative Americans want to worry about unprotected vaginal intercourse, they should worry about the drive over to their encounters. If their partners have never injected drugs or received rectal intercourse or blood therapy, they are more likely to be killed in an automobile accident on the ride over than they are to become HIV-positive.”

“The data show that frequency of receptive anal intercourse with an HIV-positive man and frequency of drug-injecting correlates with seroconversion. But frequency of unprotected vaginal intercourse with an HIV-positive person does not correlate with seroconversion, so that activity does not qualify as a risk factor. Everybody thinks that unprotected vaginal intercourse with an HIV-positive person will put you at risk for becoming HIV positive yourself. But this just isn’t the case.”

“It is not so easy to get all people who inject drugs or who participate in rectal intercourse to admit to these activities. Research and experience have shown us that people lie often and for many reasons, and that the content of these lies includes the IV [drug] and anal intercourse risk factors for HIV transmission. Such lying is one of the factors contributing to an inflated estimate of vaginal HIV transmission. A total liar rate of 5% is more than adequate to account for all the cases of HIV transmission and AIDS which are classified as heterosexual.”

“HIV researchers who publish these papers do not seem to be serious about accurately accounting for anal intercourse and drug injecting. The very studies that claim to document vaginal transmission show that coitus frequency does not correlate with seroconversion, but that frequency of receptive anal intercourse does.”

“In some special cases, and this may be true for HIV [tests], most of the positive results you get are false. So you run the risk of creating more heart attacks from false positives than identifying people who really are positive.”

“The gross exaggeration of AIDS risk to healthy, non-IVDU heterosexuals is not only psychologically damaging, but also constitutes unethical behavior on the part of many public health officials, journalists, and others.”

Reappraising AIDS; Sex at Risk: Lifetime Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse, and the Low AIDS Risk of Vaginal Intercourse (1997); Archives of Sexual Behavior 1995

— Dr. Stuart Brody, PhD, Adjunct Research Associate Professor of Medical Psychology, University of Tubingen, Germany. Author, Sex at Risk

“It is possible to suggest not only that the AIDS ‘epidemic’ is vastly overstated and overrated, but also that resources spent fighting it might better be employed on more basic, and more general, infrastructure and health needs...When medical realities collide with scaremongering and false realities, the latter too often triumph.”

“Even today, the cause for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS or HIV/AIDS) remains controversial...The virus does not seem to directly damage many cells but is thought to impede immune system function.”

“Some scientists find that other physiological insults, such as overwhelming and repeated infections from contaminated IV needles used by drug abusers and from homosexual sexual activity, overwhelm and weaken the immune system, and cause most AIDS cases.”

“On top of these controversies, the criteria for diagnosing AIDS have changed three or four times. And each time the criteria change, the number of people qualifying for the diagnosis increases.”

“In the past, a person might have HIV antibodies and tuberculosis; nowadays, this counts as HIV/AIDS, as do dozens of other combinations of signs and symptoms. These changing criteria result in higher numbers of people being diagnosed with AIDS with each change in the criteria, creating an epidemic of diagnostic ‘grade inflation.’”

“In Africa, poverty, distance and isolation make accurate, continent-wide diagnosis and statistics impossible. As a result, most health and population statistics are estimates or guesses, often driven by political and cultural agendas and always driven by the need to generate more outside funding from wealthier regions of the world. Thus, the severity of just about everything gets ‘oversold.’ This is especially true for AIDS...”

“AIDS information is also difficult to assess because the definition of AIDS is different in Africa. Indeed, blood test results don’t even figure in the official diagnostic criteria. ”It’s all done on ‘points’ defined at the ‘AIDS in Africa’ meeting in Bangui in October 1985...the meeting participants concluded that AIDS in Africa could be diagnosed without a blood test by scoring 12 points out of a possible total of 50, based on symptoms and signs alone. ”People having the first three (10 percent weight lost, protracted asthenia [weakness] and repeated attacks of fever for more than a month) have already racked up a score of 11. A cough scores two more points, and ‘the diagnosis of AIDS is established.’”

“Many other non-specific signs are worth points, such as diarrhea, lung disease, signs consistent with herpes virus infections, generalized lymph node enlargement and ‘neurological signs.’ In other words, many Africans diagnosed with AIDS would not carry the diagnosis in the developed world. And many people have these qualifying symptoms from the many other diseases prevalent in poor regions.”

“But if it is impossible to determine the extent of the epidemic, it should be easy to tell whether AIDS has, as predicted, ‘decimated’ sub-Saharan Africa. Clearly, this has not happened. Sub-Saharan Africa’s population is estimated to have increased by 73 percent over the last two decades, to 752 million (according to the Population Reference Bureau’s 2005 World Population Data Sheet at”

“In another analysis, South Africa’s population continues to grow at a rate most consistent with ‘no AIDS’ projections. In other words, predictions based on the hypothesis that AIDS kills have not come true.”

“But even if these population estimates are way off, one implication is clear. Committing resources to fight a non-existent epidemic makes no sense, except to those making a living off the funds generated by the scares. Resources fighting phantom epidemics can’t be used to improve basic sanitation and nutrition, the foundations of health.”

“In sum, it is quite possible that fighting AIDS as the scaremongers desire would kill and sicken more people than AIDS treatment would save.”

Jewish World Review, Nov. 18, 2005

— Michael Arnold Glueck, MD, Harvard University, Medical Writer.
— Robert J. Cihak, MD, Harvard University, Past President, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and a Discovery Institute Senior Fellow

Morally, the constructive course to follow in sub-Saharan Africa on AIDS would be for the developed nations of the world to provide or lend money to African countries: leave these countries to move forward with desperately needed improvements in sanitation, to rebuild infrastructures that bring adequate medical care to citizens afflicted by poverty-related diseases, to relieve conditions that breed malnutrition (which perpetuates susceptibility to the many illnesses that have ravaged Africa for centuries).

Above all, first wait and see if such improvements lower the death rates among Africans. Then, if the alarming rise in deaths reported in recent years doesn't abate, consider HIV as a possible reason, and lend money on the stipulation that it must be used to block the spread of AIDS. Then, but only then, get on with the condomizing of sub-Saharan Africa, of every "underdeveloped" nation on the globe where AIDS has manifested.

Books have been published on why the more likely course is the one that Western governments and non-governmental organizations have already shamelessly, evangelically taken,11 the one that promises profits for the US and a sprinkle of other high-tech countries through what is essentially a medical form of neocolonialism, the one that portends an immense disaster for black Africans, especially women and children. Note well in this connection: in university studies where Africans clinically diagnosed with AIDS (according to the Bangui definition and its variants) are tested serologically for HIV, the majority of the test results prove antibody-negative!

Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients, January 2006

— Marcus A. Cohen, Medical Columnist, Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, Author: Lyme Disease Update: Science, Policy & Law, New York

“Dr. R. Mathias, a virologist and epidemiologist at the University of British Columbia, has stated categorically, ‘There is no heterosexual spread of AIDS.’”

“In [sub-Saharan Africa], national figures on HIV/AIDS are based on inappropriate extrapolations from hospitalized patients and clients of STD clinics. The second circumstance is that most of the testing in Africa is unsupervised, not validated and conducted in dysfunctional laboratories using out-of-date reagents. The third is that the World Health Organization’s clinical case definition for AIDS in Africa permits the diagnosis to be made based on the presence of weight loss, chronic diarrhea, prolonged fever and persistent cough. These conditions are neither new nor uncommon in Africa, Asia or India. Thus, the numbers quoted by the authors should be considered from a critical and sceptical perspective.”

“It is necessary to emphasize that the HIV test does not confirm the presence of HIV. Rather, it confirms the existence of markers that may (or may not) be surrogate identifiers for the virus... Until HIV is isolated and purified from infected cases, it is impossible to determine if the antibody reactions to it are truly specific or examples of cross-reactivity. According to Dr. de Harven, ‘Back in 1993 it became clear that the so-called HIV antibody tests badly lacked specificity, cross-reactivity being observed with patients suffering froma long list of pathological conditions.’ Therefore, the value of HIV tests must be questioned no matter how often they are performed on a single sample.”

“Dr. Nutt and her fellow writers believe that a test that is 99.9% accurate limits ‘the opportunity for either false negative or false positive results.’ A simple calculation demonstrates the inaccuracy of this statement: The specificity of a test is its ability to recognize individuals who do not have the condition. An accuracy of 99.9% means that the test will fail to identify that 0.1% of the subjects do not have the disease. These people will be recorded as positive responders, when in reality they are false positives.

“For the purposes of this calculation, it will be assumed that Canada has a population of 30,003,000 and that there are 3,000 new cases of HIV infection per year. If the entire population was tested, the results should identify the 3,000 truly positive individuals. However, since the test is not 100% accurate, it would fail in 0.1% of tests on the remaining 30,000,000 to recognize that they do not have the infection. Unfortunately, 0.1% of 30 million is 30,000. Therefore, for the 3,000 true positives that the test would reveal, it would falsely identify 30,000 Canadians as being infected. A ratio of 10 to one in favour of false positives is unacceptable considering the emotional, financial and medical burdens that accompany the diagnosis of HIV infection and, by extension, AIDS.”

“The calculation demonstrates the inherent liabilities of tests that rely upon possible markers for a micro-organism rather than the verifiable presence of the causative agent.”

“Since the late 1980s and with increasing influence, an international group of prominent scientists (including Nobel laureates), medical researchers, lawyers, politicians and informed laypersons has had the courage, wisdom and tenacity to challenge the official dogma on HIV and AIDS. In the process it has amassed a considerable volume of pertinent literature.”

Journal of the Canadian Dental Association. 1999; 65:337-40

— John Hardie, BDS, MSc, PhD, FRCDC. Clinical Director, Dental Services, DownLisburn Trust, County Antrim. Northern Ireland.

“Almost all reactions (on the HIV tests) especially in low-risk populations, represent false positive results.”

1992. “Identification of crossreactive epitopes recognized by HIV- false-positive sera.” AIDS. 6: 1547-1548

— Langedijk, Vos, W., Doornum, G, et al, Aids researchers

“90 percent of positive tests in low-risk populations are in fact false. Falsely labeling individuals applying for marriage licenses, pregnant women, health care workers and patients admitted to the hospital as carrying the virus is certainly irresponsible and can have an enormous psychological and social impact on the individuals.”

American Journal of Epidemiology, 1992

— Dr. Xin M. Tu, PhD, Harvard University School of Public Health, Associate Professor, Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania

“These tests are not accurate; they are a treacherous deception and making any life-and-death decisions based on a positive antibody test is a very foolish thing to do. It can only lead to tragedy.”

Playing Russian Roulette In The Laboratory,

— Christine Johnson, science journalist, Los Angeles, member of MENSA, is on the Board of Advisors of Continuum magazine and is a former copy-editor of Reappraising AIDS.

“There are several risks associated with HIV/AIDS, but the most important immediate risk, soon after an individual becomes aware of his/her HIV status, is committing suicide. This is as a result of sudden unexpected, unprepared disclosure of HIV test result, leading to mental breakdown, i.e., severe acute depression.”

“A study carried out in New York City (1997) found that 9% of suicide victims were HIV positive. The HIV seroconversion among the victims of suicide was found to be twice that of the general population.”

“Currently, HIV/AIDS is the commonest cause of acute depression…Critical psychosocial stressors of HIV/AIDS including social stigma, discrimination, isolation, lack of support from family and friends, and social devaluation, enhance suicide risk.”

“…This is a nine-fold increase in female fatal poisoning, and twenty-two times increase in the spread of HIV/AIDS. This could be possible as in recent years, several right-to-die groups have advocated that individuals with AIDS use poisoning as a means of self-inflicted death. However, more than two-thirds of HIV-positive suicide victims continue to use more violent means such as hanging, firearms, and other violent methods.”

Anil Aggrawal’s Internet Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 2003

— Dr. B.L. Meel, MD, Head, Department of Forensic Medicine, University of Transkei, South Africa
". . . the Jews are irreligious, atheistic, immoral bunch of bastards." "...generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on us."- Richard Nixon
black African Americans Asian Hispanic Black Katrina Blacks African-American Jew Negro Bush Negroes
Old February 6th, 2009 #9
Larry Heinberg
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 615
Larry Heinberg

Yeah, like I'm going to read a 15 thousand word post which apparently contains no actual evidence about HIV and its relation to AIDS.
Old February 6th, 2009 #10
Curtis Stone
Senior Member
Curtis Stone's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,057
Curtis Stone

I knew AIDS was a phony scare for the general population, but I didn't know it was a phony scare for homos. The jist of it all seems to be that the drugs to fight AIDS are what kills the patients? This is too weird for me.

In 1990, Neville Hodgkinson, then medical and science correspondent of the London Sunday Times, wrote: “If HIV does not cause AIDS, then we will have witnessed the biggest medical and scientific blunder of this century.”

Eighteen years later, it seems all but certain that Hodgkinson was right.

Sheila Casey is a DC-based journalist. Her work has appeared in The Denver Post, Reuters, Chicago Sun-Times, Dissident Voice, Common Dreams and the Rock Creek Free Press. She blogs at

Last edited by Curtis Stone; February 6th, 2009 at 10:58 PM.
Old February 6th, 2009 #11
Curtis Stone
Senior Member
Curtis Stone's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,057
Curtis Stone
Default Deusberg

Summary -- It is proposed that the new American and European AIDS epidemics are caused by recreational and anti-HIV drugs rather than by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Chronologically, the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s followed a massive escalation in the consumption of recreational drugs that started in the 1960s and 70s. Epidemiologically, both epidemics derive about 80 % of their victims from the same groups of 20-44 year-olds, of which 90 % are males. In America 32% of these are intravenous drug users and an unknown percentage are prescribed the cytotoxic DNA chain terminator AZT, as inhibitor of HIV. Direct evidence indicates that these drugs are necessary for HIV-positives and sufficient for HIV-negatives to develop AIDS diseases. The drug-AIDS hypothesis predicts correctly that: (i) AIDS is new in the US, because the drug epidemic is new, while the HIV epidemic is old -- fixed at a constant 1 million Americans since 1985; (ii) despite an increase in venereal diseases, AIDS remains restricted to long-term drug users and small groups with clinical deficiencies; (iii) over 72 % of AIDS occurs in 20-44 year old males, because they make up over 80% of hard psychoactive drug use; (iv) distinct AIDS diseases correlate with the use of distinct drugs, eg Kaposi's sarcoma with nitrite inhalants, tuberculosis with intravenous drugs, and leukopenia, anemia, and nausea with AZT; (v) AIDS diseases are only acquired after long-term drug consumption, rather than after single contacts as the virus-hypothesis predicts. The drug hypothesis can be tested epidemiologically and experimentally in animals. It predicts that most AIDS can be prevented by stopping the consumption of drugs, and provides a rational basis for therapy.
Old February 6th, 2009 #12
George Witzgall
Senior Member
George Witzgall's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,961
George Witzgall

this whole aids ("aids") business seems fishy. maybe vox populae can render a judgement?
I understand and do not understand.

Last edited by George Witzgall; February 6th, 2009 at 11:12 PM.
Old February 14th, 2009 #13
Nick Succorso
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,396
Nick Succorso

Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
this whole aids ("aids") business seems fishy. maybe vox populae can render a judgement?
HIV causes "AIDS"

AIDS cures George Witzgall.
Old February 28th, 2009 #14
rod crowley
Junior Member
rod crowley's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 212
rod crowley

whatever the case may be....the aids virus is truly the great white hope!With 1 in 30 affected with the disease their chances arent too good.
Old March 30th, 2009 #15
Don't call me Junior
DouglasReed's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 293

This is the one scam I see no profit, as a White Nationalist, in trying to expose.
Old March 30th, 2009 #16
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,571

Originally Posted by Curtis Stone View Post
Summary -- It is proposed that the new American and European AIDS epidemics are caused by recreational and anti-HIV drugs rather than by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Chronologically, the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s followed a massive escalation in the consumption of recreational drugs that started in the 1960s and 70s. Epidemiologically, both epidemics derive about 80 % of their victims from the same groups of 20-44 year-olds, of which 90 % are males. In America 32% of these are intravenous drug users and an unknown percentage are prescribed the cytotoxic DNA chain terminator AZT, as inhibitor of HIV. Direct evidence indicates that these drugs are necessary for HIV-positives and sufficient for HIV-negatives to develop AIDS diseases. The drug-AIDS hypothesis predicts correctly that: (i) AIDS is new in the US, because the drug epidemic is new, while the HIV epidemic is old -- fixed at a constant 1 million Americans since 1985; (ii) despite an increase in venereal diseases, AIDS remains restricted to long-term drug users and small groups with clinical deficiencies; (iii) over 72 % of AIDS occurs in 20-44 year old males, because they make up over 80% of hard psychoactive drug use; (iv) distinct AIDS diseases correlate with the use of distinct drugs, eg Kaposi's sarcoma with nitrite inhalants, tuberculosis with intravenous drugs, and leukopenia, anemia, and nausea with AZT; (v) AIDS diseases are only acquired after long-term drug consumption, rather than after single contacts as the virus-hypothesis predicts. The drug hypothesis can be tested epidemiologically and experimentally in animals. It predicts that most AIDS can be prevented by stopping the consumption of drugs, and provides a rational basis for therapy.
I was a drug addict in San Francisco in the 80's. I saw it all first hand, front row. HIV causes AIDS. There are plenty of homosexual men who use drugs like coke and meth, and both of those drugs, especially meth are correlated with high cases of HIV because of the unsafe sex with multiple partners the drug encourages.

Last edited by Bardamu; March 30th, 2009 at 10:27 PM.
Old March 30th, 2009 #17
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,571

There are these cases we all read about regularly with infected Blacks who know they are infected having sex with women and spreading the disease to them without informing them until it is too late.. These cases are constantly in the news. These infected girls don't even use drugs, or if they do they do so moderately.
Old March 31st, 2009 #18
Don't call me Junior
DouglasReed's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Boston
Posts: 293

Originally Posted by Bardamu View Post
There are these cases we all read about regularly with infected Blacks who know they are infected having sex with women and spreading the disease to them without informing them until it is too late.. These cases are constantly in the news. These infected girls don't even use drugs, or if they do they do so moderately.
The girls were no more "infected" than the niggers were. They were told the same lie.

There's no AIDS. It's a hoax. People go get a test for HIV, which is present in everyone, and then are told that they have a disease that doesn't exist and need to start taking poison.

YouTube - HIV is a Hoax
Old March 31st, 2009 #19
Mike in Denver
Mike in Denver's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,171
Mike in Denver

Originally Posted by DouglasReed View Post
The girls were no more "infected" than the niggers were. They were told the same lie.

There's no AIDS. It's a hoax. People go get a test for HIV, which is present in everyone, and then are told that they have a disease that doesn't exist and need to start taking poison.

YouTube - HIV is a Hoax
You are correct, but it's an impossible task to convince people. Just about anyone can be diagnosed with AIDS. All you have to do is generate some antibodies to about any viral infection and you might end up with a diagnosis of AIDS. The danger is that the government, knowing this, may some day use AIDS diagnoses as a means of control.

I pity the normal folks, and there have been many, who have accepted such a diagnosis and taken AZT and similar drugs that are guaranteed to kill you.

HIV doesn't cause AIDS. Nothing causes AIDS. There is no such disease.

And as an added point. Niggers are not dying in Africa in any unexpected or different way than before the phony African AIDS epidemic. Sadly, there is no AIDS epidemic in Africa. Since millions of Whites have abandoned Africa, niggers are dying of things they have always died of, but sadly not in great enough numbers to diminish their population.

You have to remember I live in Denver and some things are perfectly legal here that aren't where you live.

Last edited by Mike in Denver; March 31st, 2009 at 04:30 PM.
Old March 31st, 2009 #20
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046

Originally Posted by Larry Heinberg View Post
Yeah, like I'm going to read a 15 thousand word post which apparently contains no actual evidence about HIV and its relation to AIDS.
Please don't clutter the board with irrelevant posts, if you wont read your opponents evidence then simply don't reply. No one cares about your sophistry.


Display Modes

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 AM.
Page generated in 0.25721 seconds.