“The man that wandereth out of the way of understanding shall remain in the congregation of the dead.” (Proberbs 21:16)
As Christians we are obligated to bring every thought into captivity to Christ. As Christ is the embodiment of Truth, we are to pursue truth in this veil of tears, regardless of where it leads us. God gave us minds to critically evaluate the world around us and has told us to never let other people define our realities for us or put us into bondage to their ways of looking at the world.
There is not one study that proves HIV causes AIDS! Ask your physician or any virologist to show you the original study proving this connection.
Many “AIDS experts,” though many perhaps quite well meaning, are putting people into bondage to a paradigm that rewards them, virus hunters, drug companies, and assorted organizations quite handsomely. I hope that this article serves to liberate many from the bondage to which we have been exposed regarding the connection between HIV and AIDS.
I feel it’s very important for one to make an informed decision about this issue, as the dominant view of this subject may well be costing lives. To date, over 50 billiion dollars have been spent on the HIV-AIDS hypothesis.
If “AIDS” is sexually transmitted, one would have to assume that Blacks have different sexual practices than whites, as Blacks in this country are said to have 10 times the rate of AIDS than do whites. The HIV-AIDS paradigm is false, and money that could be going to improved living conditions, drug education, sanitation, and nutrition, is going into feathering the nests of the AIDS industry.
I hope you read the sources cited and make up your own mind, and not take the word of people whose careers, funding, and reputations ride on the dominant paradigm that there is such a thing as AIDS and that it is sexually transmitted.
First of all, you should read Peter Duesberg, Inventing the Aids Virus; see the web site HEAL; the web site virusmyth.com; the superb web site Alive and Well.
Basically, there is excellent evidence to indicate that HIV is a harmless retrovirus that at the very most may be a co-factor in so-called AIDS. It is unheard of for a retrovirus to have a latency period of one or more decades, let alone cause such devastation.
AIDS is an umbrella of about 30 old diseases and is a statistical artifact. For example, if someone is HIV positive and has pneumonia, he is said to have AIDS; if he’s HIV negative he is said to have pneumonia. If he is HIV positive and has tuberculosis he is said to have AIDS; if he is HIV negative he is said to have tuberculosis.
Moreover, the rates of AIDS are manipulated both by adding diseases under its umbrella as well as by changing the criteria of an AIDS diagnosis. For example, a few years ago, the CD4 cell count was added as a criterion. By this addition, we could expect the “AIDS epidemic” to lessen. When it did presumably lessen, the “anti-virals” were given the credit.
In addition, the HIV-AIDS hypothesis doesn’t meet any of Koch’s Postulates, the traditional way of discerning if a pathogen is responsible for a given disease. Also, when one is tested for HIV, it is not HIV that is tested for, but presumed antibodies to HIV. This is significant, in that antibodies protect against disease; they don’t cause disease. There are many cross reactions to an HIV test so, for example, if you get a flu vaccine and then get tested for HIV you may well come up with a positive reading.
It may well be that since viral causes of cancer weren’t panning out after about twenty years of futile research, and funding was drying up, AIDS was defined and in a press conference by Robert Gallo attributed to the HI virus. Such an announcement is unheard of without its basis first being published as a study in a learned journal for evaluation by one’s peers.
At the time of Gallo’s announcement at a press conference, relatively few people had the few diseases comprising what was called AIDS, apparently about half of them turning out to be HIV negative. As an aside, it’s curious that a discoverer of a retrovirus that allegedly causes such a devastating “disease” as “AIDS” has not been given the Nobel Prize.
Now, the list of diseases under the umbrella of “AIDS” has greatly expanded, from about 6 to about 30. By expanding the list of “AIDS defining diseases,” the rates of AIDS would be expected to increase.
There is good evidence to indicate that the DNA chain terminator AZT, as well as the protease inhibitors, may be making people sick and perhaps even die, and when they sicken and die they are said to die of AIDS or, most recently called, “HIV Disease.”
AZT was originally developed for leukemia patients as chemotherapy, but when it was found to be so toxic that it caused wasting and other assorted devastation it was deemed to be too dangerous to be tested on humans; it was taken off the market about 35 years ago. Moreover, it was never designed to be an “anti-viral.”
By inventing AIDS, AZT was able to be taken off the shelf and marketed as an anti-viral that may be sickening and killing people. All one has to do is read the label on AZT, a facsimile of which can be seen on the Alive and Well web site, and see how toxic it is. As Duesberg suggested, AZT may well be AIDS by prescription.
According to Duesberg and others, AIDS is an umbrella of about 30 life-style diseases that can be attributed in Europe and America to long-term recreational drug use, prophylactic long term use of antibiotics to prevent recurrent veneral disease, heroin, designer drugs, cocaine, and nitrite inhalants which suppress the immune system.
Moreover, what we were not told until ferreted out by a tenacious reporter is that many thousands of people have been diagnosed with “AIDS” who are HIV negative.
In America, AIDS is localized to about 90% males; there is no evidence that AIDS is sexually transmissible. In Africa, on the other hand, HIV and “AIDS” are about equally distributed between men and women. When nutrition and sanitation are improved their symptoms of wasting (called Slim Disease), tuberculosis, parasitic infections, and other assorted diseases caused by grinding poverty frequently lessen or disappear. However, since so much money is going into the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, money that could go to public health, nutrition, and sanitation is being used in this futile way.
Before I researched this issue I thought AIDS was the end stage of HIV infection. However, I’m now convinced that AIDS is not sexually transmitted and that if people abstained from recreational drugs, did not take the “medications” designed to treat this so-called “disease,” and lived healthy lives, the rates of the various diseases that comprise “AIDS” in this country and in Europe would plummet, as they would plummet in Africa and other developing countries if sufficient money were spent on nutrition, sanitation, and housing.
Although I’m not a virologist, the Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis, who wrote the foreward to Duesberg’s book, Duesberg who is a premier retrovirologist, and many others see the HIV-AIDS hypothesis as one gigantic mistake.
Unfortunately, the belief that HIV causes AIDS, has gone from an assumption, to a hypothesis, to a paradigm, to a dogma, and there is absolutely no scientific study to prove that contention.
Where is the original study that proves that HIV causes AIDS? I defy anyone to find it.
Based on the unsubstantiated hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS, HIV positive mothers and their HIV positive children are frightened and frequently forced to take the highly toxic drugs that can cause great physiological devastation, perhaps leading to death. Moreover, many gay organizations are fighting to get better access to these “medicines.”
Many people are being forced to pitch, or unwittingly are pitching, their tents toward “the congregation of the dead.”
Rev. Dr. Jerry S. Maneker, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at California State University, Chico, served as an ordained priest in the Congregational Catholic Church, a division of the Independent Catholic Churches International (ICCI). For many years he published a weekly column in the Sacramento Valley Mirror titled “Christianity and Society,” where he dealt with a variety of social issues from a biblical and sociological perspective. Maneker also published a blog called “A Christian Voice for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Rights” and the website Radical Christianity.