preppy or alex your thoughts on this please

FuSoYa

Lunarian
Nov 9, 2001
7,882
6
38
Brooklyn
lifesci.ucsb.edu
AIDS:
The Great Con Trick
by David Icke



AIDS: The Great Con Trick HIV does NOT cause Aids. HIV does not cause anything. A staggering statement given the hype and acceptance by the scientific establishment and, through them, the public that the HIV virus is the only cause of Aids. HIV is a weak virus and does not dismantle the immune system. Nor is Aids passed on sexually. There are two main types of virus. Using the aeroplane analogy, you could call one of these virus strains a "pilot" virus. It can change the nature of a cell and steer it into disease. This usually happens very quickly after the virus takes hold. Then there is the "passenger" virus which lives off the cell, goes along for the ride, but never affects the cell to the extent that it causes disease.

HIV is a passenger virus!

So how on earth did it become the big bogy man virus of the world? The person who announced that HIV caused Aids was an American, Doctor Robert Gallo. He has since been accused of professional misconduct, his test has been exposed as fraudulent, and two of his laboratory executives have been convicted of criminal offences. Tens of millions of people are tested for HIV antibodies every year and Dr Gallo, who patented his "test", gets a royalty for every one. Luc Montagnier, Gallo's partner in the HIV-causes-Aids theory, has since admitted in 1989: "HIV is not capable of causing the destruction of the immune system which is seen in people with Aids". Nearly 500 scientists across the world agree with him. So does Dr Robert E Wilner, author of the book 'The Deadly Deception. The Proof That Sex And HIV Absolutely Do Not Cause Aids'.

Dr Wilner even injected himself with the HIV virus on a television chat show in Spain to support his claims. Other doctors and authors come to the same conclusions, among them Peter Duesberg PhD and John Yiamouyiannis PhD, in their book, 'Aids: The Good News Is That HIV Doesn't Cause It. The Bad News Is "Recreational Drugs" And Medical Treatments Like AZT Do'. That's a long title, but it sums up the situation. People are dying of Aids because of the treatments used to "treat" Aids! It works like this. Now it is accepted by the establishment and the people that HIV causes Aids, the system has built this myth into its whole diagnosis and "treatment". You go to the doctor and you are told your HIV test was positive(positive only for the HIV antibodies, by the way, they don't actually test for the virus itself). Because of the propaganda, many people already begin to die emotionally and mentally when they are told they are HIV positive. They have been conditioned to believe that death is inevitable.

The fear of death leads them to accept, often demand, the hyped-up "treatments" which are supposed to stop Aids occurring. (They don't.) The most famous is AZT, produced by the Wellcome organisation, owned, wait for it, by the Rockefellers, one of the key manipulating families in the New World Order.

AZT was developed as an anti-cancer drug to be used in chemotherapy, but it was found to be too toxic even for that! AZT's effect in the "treatment" of cancer was to kill cells - simple as that - not just to kill cancer cells , but to kill cells, cancerous and healthy. The question, and this is accepted even by the medical establishment, was: would AZT kill the cancer cells before it had killed so many healthy cells that it killed the body? This is the drug used to "treat" HIV. What is its effect?

It destroys the immune system, so CAUSING Aids. People are dying from the treatment, not the HIV.Aids is simply the breakdown of the immune system, for which there are endless causes, none of them passed on through sex. That's another con which has made a fortune for condom manufacturers and created enormous fear around the expression of our sexuality and the release and expansion of our creative force.

What has happened since the Great Aids Con is that now anyone who dies from a diminished immune system is said to have died of the all encompassing term, Aids. It is even built into the diagnosis. If you are HIV positive and you die of tuberculosis, pneumonia, or 25 other unrelated diseases now connected by the con men to "Aids", you are diagnosed as dying of Aids. If you are not HIV positive and you die of one of those diseases you are diagnosed as dying of that disease, not Aids. This manipulates the figures every day to indicate that only HIV positives die of Aids.

This is a lie.

Many people who die from Aids are not HIV positive and the reason that the figures for Aids deaths have not soared as predicted is that the overwhelming majority of people diagnosed HIV positive have never developed Aids. Why?

Because HIV has nothing whatsoever to do with Aids.

Anything that breaks down the immune system causes Aids and that includes so-called recreational drugs. The vast majority of Aids deaths in the United States involve homosexuals and this perpetuates the myth that it has something to do with sex. But homosexuals in the US are among the biggest users of drugs which genuine doctors have linked to Aids. Prostitutes who take drugs often get Aids, prostitutes who do not take drugs invariably do not get Aids. The rise in the Aids figures in the United States corresponds perfectly with the increase in the use of drugs - most of which are made available to people on the streets by elements within the US Government, including Bill Clinton and George Bush. In Africa, the breakdown of the immune system, now known as Aids, is caused by ill health - lack of good food, clean water and the general effects of poverty. Haemophiliacs do not die from HIV-infected blood, they die, as they did before the Aids scam, from a quirk in their own immune system. Their immune system locks into foreign proteins in the infused blood and on rare occasions it can become confused during this process and attack itself. Their immune system, in effect, commits suicide. HIV is irrelevant to that. Yet how many people today who have been diagnosed HIV positive are having their lives blighted by the fear that the symptoms of Aids will start any moment?

AZT is the killer. There is not a single case of AZT reversing the symptoms of Aids. How can it? It's causing them, for goodness sake. The Aids industry is now worth billions of pounds a year and makes an unimaginable fortune for the drug industry controlled by the Rockefellers and the rest of the Global Elite. For more detailed information, I strongly recommend, 'Aids: The Good News Is HIV Doesn't Cause It. The Bad News Is "Recreational Drugs" And Medical Treatments Like AZT Do' It is published by Health Action Press, 6439 Taggart Road, Delaware, Ohio, 43015.
 
see, i mean... i have actually read a lot more extensively... things by this guy, and when he really gets down to it, his microbiological sense is a BIT off. i mean, he's right in all senses except one, no one says HIV alone causes AIDS, and he is like, some bizarre conspiracy builder just because of a few scientific assumptions (what science DOES NOT make assumptions though?)
HIV has to be in a body with the precept to allow it to transmit to the WBC's it attacks. and there are, christ, an inumerable amount of mutations and concoctions of the HIV strain. so how can you do a viral study on one and make a conclusion.
but, you know, it's funny. ever see a room full of doctors agree? the reason they don't is because microbiology of cancer and AIDS is not an exact science. it is guesswork, much as things like autoimmune diseases are (they dont know what causes them, and they have no idea why the medications used to treat them even work!) so anyone claiming to be like OKAY THIS IS HOW AIDS GOES is going to be off. another thing i think him AND other doctor's generally dont take into consideration is that there is an entire world OUTSIDE of virology. there is the acid/alkaline balance in the blood. this basically decides who gets sick and who doesn't. too much acid, DEAD too much alkaline, DEAD. the japanese doctors refer to this as being 'sanpaku'. and like, that leads to death from AIDS more than HIV does. but HIV doesn't help. and no one really has AIDS like symptoms without HIV. this dude refers to some cases in one of his studies but like, why do the hospitals he cites never admit to having these patients even on an anonymous level?


i don't entirely disagree that there is more to full blown AIDS than just having HIV. i also don't disagree that AZT is deadly. i dont disagree that if i could, i'd take most, if not all, of my clients off of their drug cocktails and beg them to attempt alternative means of treatment. i see them get cancer and die from their meds every day. i see little kids with AIDS dehydrating and dying from it.
what i do disagree with is that it's not transmitted sexually. he has never proven that at all. it came, literally, out of his butt (maybe he had sex there, i dunno) and he is mostly just acting like a big instigator talking mad shit and not backing it up, as the hip hop world would say.

but anyway, i dont really have an answer to any of it. any person who knows science will admit that there are only guesses and half truths to most all things. HIV and AIDS are elusive in that way. just like the common cold, just like the plague, just like MS, just like cancer...
 
That guy is absolutely insane, and so are the members of ACT-UP/San Francisco and the various sub-Saharan countries who also believe that 'HIV does not cause AIDS'. It's true that most of the drug cocktails are toxic, but so are many medicines for other sicknesses, too; it's a matter of what's the lesser of two evils, and the cocktails DO slow the progress of the disease. Besides, I don't think AZT is even used with huge frequency any more--the newer cocktails are less toxic and work better.

And you can't say that someone "died from AIDS" and nothing else, generally, because its effect is that is causes normally resistable diseases to be UNresistable. You could normally get Kaposi's Sarcoma without HIV in your system at all, but your body is usually strong enough to fight it off; once AIDS takes hold, your body can't do anything and these everyday ailments become killer.

But homosexuals in the US are among the biggest users of drugs which genuine doctors have linked to Aids. Prostitutes who take drugs often get Aids, prostitutes who do not take drugs invariably do not get Aids.

Obviously TOTAL bullshit. This sounds like the statistics Southern Baptists make up to prove that gay men are usually child molestors.

It's a testament to how ravaging AIDS is that people get so panicked they have to grasp at straws to hope for a cure. We're so desperate that we've sunk to the point of denying reality in an attempt to cope. Fine. Whatever, if it only hurts yourself. The problem is, this belief is pernicious, not benign. When you tell people they don't need to worry about condoms, when you tell people to flush their meds without providing alternative treatments--which do exist--that's furthering the spread of the virus. In some of the most panicked and irrational African nations, they PREVENT social workers from distributing condoms and literature on how to prevent on the spread of HIV! They fucking prevent the free distribution of drugs that allow an HIV+ mother to give birth to an HIV- child! How evil is that?
 
xfer is like, mr. on point.
the only thing is, AZT is actually making a comeback because so many people are drug resistant to everything else.
the only time i would hardcore recommend a client be taking as many drugs as possible is during pregnany because it reduces transmission probability by like, tons.
 
icke.jpg


hi I am CRAZY CRAZY
 
things like this dude's proposition really bother me. because you know, he is feeding on people's fear and denial. it's similar to people's false belief that there are people who were once very much HIV+ who are now totally HIV-. like, that just doesn't happen. they can TEST with no viral load or be 'undetectable' but like, there is no reversal.
 
heh, preppy, do you remember some thread i did like six months ago about our friend Dave who has this theory that "magic johnson doesn't have AIDS"? SO FRUSTRATING to argue with him.
 
i dont remember that thread, but you know... it's always difficult to argue with someone who has an opinion based entirely on a total lack of knowledge in that particular department.
like, no primary source material to work with per se.
 
well, i don't know about "no primary source material"...this dude HAS read a book.

(granted, i mean "has read A meaning ONE book in his life", and it was the biography of Pearl Jam, but one book is better than none!)
 
haha well primary source would mean like, you know... even if you read a book ABOUT research, you look at the research too! to see if it's valid.

pearl jam needs some of the HIV.