"You Bet Your Life"

I Question the AIDS Orthodoxy

Dr. Darin Brown is asking a few questions about the AIDS orthodoxy.

In my life, there are many things I question, and a few things I don't.

I don't question whether the world is round. In fact, I'm almost positive it's round, not flat. Satellite photos, global shipsailing, no photographs of any "edge." I think the issue is settled.

I don't question whether the Holocaust occurred. In fact, on my father's side, I certainly lost a few relatives in that awful man-made scourge caused by the Third Reich. Thank God for FDR.

I do question whether the firebombing of Dresden and Tokyo were good things. Maybe, in our war fever, we killed a few hundred thousand civilians for no good reason.

I also question whether dropping the second Atomic Bomb on Nagasaki was a good idea. Seems like overkill. A lotta civilians were burned/radiated to death.

The great physicist, Richard Feynman was once questioned on his participation in the Manhattan Project. He thought, at the time, it was better for the U.S. to develop a nuclear bomb, before the Nazis did. However, in later years, he lamented that once the Nazis fell, in retrospect, perhaps the Manhattan Project should too have ceased. He regretted not questioning this back in 1945, before bombing Japan and ushering in the nuclear era.

Speaking of Physics, I question whether String Theory, Cold Fusion or Multi-verse theories are falsifiable. One smart fellow, Dr. Petr Beckmann, once questioned Einstein's Theory of Relatively -- although I don't think he got too far.

As for medicine, I wish someone had questioned the use of thalidomide, before all those deformed babies were born.

As for the miracles of modern medicine, well, I question whether 106,000 deaths per year from adverse drug reactions (4th leading death after heart disease, cancer & stroke) is a tolerable number.

As for AIDS, Yes, I question the current paradigm. Why? Well, I can think of three succint reasons:

1. The entire virus theory was conceived in fraud. See NY Times  piece on Robert Gallo.

2. The virus is harmless in chimpanzees and mice.  So, we are to believe that this deadly virus has somehow managed to kill 40 million people since 1981, but not one, solitary animal?!!?

3.  The largest study of heterosexual transmission of HIV in America showed "no seroconversions." If a lotta HIV positive folks have sex with a lotta HIV negative folks, yet not one single person contracts the virus, Well, what does that tell you?

So, inter alia, that's why I question the orthodoxy.

Any questions?

15 July 2006, UPDATED: Dr. Bialy Weaves a Nice Tale

Our Pal, Dr. Harvey  Bialy, former Scientific Editor of Nature Biotechnology, gives a nice autobiographical sketch about working in Cuba, Israel and South Africa -- simultaneously! -- before settling down in Mexico.

Man, we need more well-rounded, adventurous scientists like Dr. Bialy to rescue us from the myopia and bean-counting endemic in the scientific community today.

Also, before I forget, you may recall that the intemperate, haughty, undisciplined Professor John P. Moore at Cornell, has insinuated in print that Dr. Bialy was forced out of his Editorship due to his support of Dr. Duesberg. The above story puts an end to this ridiculous lie.

By the way, have you seen the review wars over Dr. Bialy's book at Amazon? Hmm, What happened to 'ole John's review where he pimps his own website?  Has it vanished?!!?

UPDATE !!!

I sent the url for this post to Prof. Moore, and within 30 minutes came back the one word answer of "Boring." Of course I immediately sent this to my pal doc B., and within 5 minutes I received this blind copy of his email to the now apparently muzzled, puppy prof.

Date: Jul 14, 2006 4:09 PM

Subject: Hank informs me you find being publicly corrected (2x)* "boring"

*(2x)

once by amazon monitors for placing an "inappropriate review"

second by me in giving the "truth" to your shabby insinuation about my departure from nbt

You are much 'more' strange than me, much.

-----------

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE !!!

--------------------------------------------------------

The "puppy prof" could not have been that bored because he spent considerable time composing a new review at almost 4 times the length of the previous. Quite a feat for someone who so obviously has not, and cannot, read the book he so desperately wants to destroy. Here it is (while it lasts):

----------------------------------------------------------

Missing the point on Duesberg, June 25, 2006

Reviewer:

John P Moore, PhD (New York, USA) - See all my reviews

The author completely misses the point when writing about Peter Duesberg. Perhaps because the biographer and his subject are old and close personal friends, the result is a hagiography, not an objective review of Duesberg's flawed and ultimately failed scientific career. An objective book would have discussed why it was that Duesberg adopted foolishly contrarian and scientifically inaccurate positions on oncogenes and, a few years later, on HIV and AIDS. Were Duesberg's thought-processes at this critical time in his career purely science-based? Or were they, as many of his scientific contemporaries believe, driven by his jealousy over the far greater career successes of his then-rivals in cancer virology (Bishop, Varmus, Gallo, Baltimore, for example)? A competent reviewer of Duesberg's career would have explored such a critical issue. One can only presume that the author quite deliberately elected not to do so, because to concede that personal jealousies drove his hero's public posturings would be to also concede what is generally accepted within the scientific community: that HIV does indeed cause AIDS. The point here is that Duesberg's perceived (but, nowadays, not real) stature as a professional scientist underpins the activities of a small group of individuals, including the author, that, bizarrely, deny that HIV causes AIDS. A few of the AIDS denialists, like Duesberg, are scientists whose careers fizzled out; others are zealots with extreme political views (both on the far-right and the far-left) who find AIDS denialism politically convenient; yet more are deeply troubled individuals with disturbing behavior patterns who deserve pity and professional help. Again, an objective book on this general subject area would explore issues such as these, in particular the role played by Duesberg in the AIDS denialism movement. The author utterly fails to do so, and as a result, his book is simply not worth reading. The definitive book on Duesberg therefore remains to be written, although he's probably not an interesting enough subject for a serious, professional biographer to tackle.
John P. Moore, PhD
Professor of Microbiology and Immunology,
Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York

------------------------------------------------------------------

And being a true gentleman and scholar, our pal the doc wrote him the following thank you note:

To: "John P. Moore" [email protected]

Date: Jul 15, 2006 1:40 PM

Subject: wow...thanks..this one is even better and will sell even mas libros..i hope it is also not deemed inappropriate

but i do miss the "moral truths"

anyway good luck with this one

and remember the amazon monitors are watching you

[Partially] Banned at Aetiology!

Our favorite Science Babe, Dr. Tara Smith,  has banned my ass at her blog. Here's the recap:

1. Smith wrote this typical, ignorant throw-away line -- straight outta AIDS talking points memorandum:

One of the major scourges in the countries they're targeting is AIDS, and one of the most successful prevention strategies is regular condom use.

2. I needled her a bit about the Padian Paper, reminding her that the longest American study of heterosexual transmission of HIV found "no seroconversions." This carries frightful implications for AIDS Cult members. If the risk of HIV transmission is ZERO, then obviously condoms add nothing to the equation.   

So  I asked her:

If Padian remains the "largest and longest study of heterosexual transmission of HIV in the United States" (Padian, pg 354), How come none of the HIV+ folks having sex without condoms transmitted HIV to their partners?

3. Smith got mad, responding:

Hank, all that was extensively covered in the post and comments of that discussion. I didn't dodge anything--you just keep misrepresenting both the paper's intent, and the very data within it. I'm sick of it. Stick to the topic here, please--you have your own blog if you want to continue discussion of the Padian paper. Otherwise, I'll treat them as spam.

"I'M SICK OF IT." -- yelps the frazzled Sorority Girl of Epidemiology:). I love that!

4. I continued needling her, she deleted a few of my posts, I accused her of dodging, she accused me of lying and misrepresenting Padian, then, finally, she answered with some long-winded tripe, which contained these nuggets:

I didn't dodge anything. For those of you who didn't read the prior post (which apparently includes Hank), I addressed that in the post: [Blah, blah, blah]

Seroconversion was found in the retrospective study. For the prospective portion, there were a number of limitations that reduced their ability to find seroconversions:

Attrition was severe.

Couples were counseled to use condoms and avoid risky sex practices (and indeed, condom use went way up and anal sex went down).

The vast majority of couples were followed for only a short time (~ a year).

There was a low rate of infection with other STIs in the study population.

And finally, Hank, if this study disproves sexual transmission of HIV, why isn't the author in your camp? Maybe you can answer this at your own blog; don't bother to here. Go ahead and cry "censorship," but I've allowed you to repeat yourself on here dozens of times already. Bring something new to the table and I'll retain the comment

5.  Then I wrote a tour de force (which was deleted and got me banned:)

Reduced their ability to find seroconversions?!!? I'm laughing my ass off:) You sound like one of those Bush flunkies trying to explain a "reduced ability to find" non-existent weapons of mass destruction:)

Look, Tara, the prospective study was the whole ball of wax.

Let me remind you that the authors wrote:

"To our knowledge, our study is the largest and longest study of heterosexual transmission of HIV in the United States." (Padian, pg 354.)

Let me remind you that the authors wrote:

"We observed no seroconversions after entry into the study." (Padian, pg 354.)

Let me remind you that the authors wrote:

"Nevertheless, the absence of seroincident infection over the course of the study cannot be entirely attributed to significant behavior change. No transmission occured among the 25 percent of couples who did not use condoms consistently at their last follow-up nor among the 47 couples who intermittently practiced unsafe sex during the entire duration of follow-up" (Padian, pg 356.)

The authors found "no seroconversions," tried to attribute this surprising result to increased condom use, but didn't know what to do with the 25% of HIV+ folks who refused condoms, but still did not transmit virus.

So,  Why did all these reckless, condom-free, HIV+  sex maniacs not infect their partners in the study?

The problem, Tara, is that the FACTS of Padian, conflict with your THEORY.

Honest Hank Barnes

New rule: Whenever you hear some B.S. artist yap about AIDS and condom use, remind them that the largest epidemiological study of sexual transmission of HIV in America, showed that NOBODY got HIV. The HIV+ folks  with condoms didn't spread the virus, but neither did the HIV+ folks without condoms. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA.NIL. Surely, after at least 6 years of condomless sex with an HIV+ person, you'd expect at least ONE person to have contracted the virus. But none did. Oops. There's goes the paradigm!

UPDATE!

Anticipating the rhetorical response -- What about Africa? --  I commend y'all to read the great work of Dr. Gisselquist on the subject. He's way more diplomatic than I'd be!

UPDATE: II

Tara has arrived to scold me in the comments. As if I don't get enuff hen-pecking at home from the missus....

Circumcise All Africans!

Sometimes  I wonder if the AIDS Experts Bunglers merely throw randomly at a dartboard to tout "possible" treatments for the "dreaded" epidemic.

Here's the latest -- go to Africa, circumcize all African males, prevent 300,000 deaths!!

Well, I dunno about the rest of you, but circumcizing adult males seems like a ....pretty ...dicey maneuver, if ya ask me. Might not go down too well with some of the folks there.

Strange, white, do-gooders from the bureaucratic bowels of WHO, asking grown men to drop trou for a painful little snip --- to ward off a fatal virus that they barely can find?  Sounds a bit fishy to me. Do y'all think it'll fly?

I ain't been to Africa, but I would think that some of the health problems besetting the continent probably stem from lack of clean water, lack of nutritious food, political instability due to the residual ill-effects of despicable colonial rule and some bad dictators, who usurp the law and steal foreign aid.

Call me crazy, but I'm not sure if lack of circumcision would rise to the level of a Top Ten concern over there.....

I can hear my sainted Bubbe from the Heaven reading this, and giving a loud "Oy Vey, such Mishigas these people!"

(hat tip from our Pal, Johnny Blackman)

Prison Term for Fraudulent Science!

This stooge Professor from University of Vermont, Eric Poehlman, has been sent  to Club Fed for various fraudulent research into aging and Alzeimer's. Nice to see a more concerted effort by the U.S. Attorney to shake out all this fraud that has corrupted modern day science.

Hmm.  Now that I think about it......

What is the statute of limitations for fraudulent, scientific misconduct?

I say, Re-open the Gallo investigation!

Update:

Here's Wikipedia on this jerk, Dr. Poehlman

More Bungling from AIDS experts

Actually spread the virus?!!?

More on Merck!

Incredible story about the huge sums of $$$ at stake in the Merck debacle.  A few material highlights:

* Merck has reserved $685 Million bucks to cover legal fees. This covers all the Gucci-loafer wearin', ambulance chasin' vultures that Merck has to hire to defend itself. This fixed cost is independent of whether or not Merck wins or loses. Ouch.

* Merck has tied up another $300 million in adverse judgments in various unending appeals. This figure, to date, will likely be reduced to $48 or so million, so speculate some of the experts. But, unless Merck somehow shoots the moon, expect more big-ass plaintiff's verdicts coming down the pike.

*Merck also faces class actions, filed on behalf of prescription drug plans and insurance carriers seeking treble damages, that experts say could expose Merck to multi-billion dollar verdicts.  Yikes!

* Then, you have the states joining the fun with another round of lawsuits, arguing that their pension funds have been damaged by Merck's skulldudgery. 31 States have already initiated civil investigations. Texas Attorney General, Gregg Abbott, is seeking $168 million and says he can prove total damages in excess of $250 million over five years in payments for Vioxx.

New York's Controller, Alan Hevesi, claims his state's retirement fund lost $171 million when Merck's stock value dropped and that teachers, policemen, and firefighters have lost $287 million all total from their retirement funds.

Moreover, our hero, Dr. David Graham, of FDA fame, adds to the Merck misery. Last March, Merck lost a major legal battle that had the company's attorneys kicking and screaming, when US District Judge Eldon Fallon ordered Dr. Graham to testify in a deposition in response to a subpoena from attorneys for Vioxx plaintiffs. Nobody can touch Doc Graham on FDA incompetence and Big Pharma influence.

Finally, and most notably, you wanna hear a large, public, joyous "Ouch"? Check this out:

When Vioxx was pulled off the market in September 2004, the drug's $2.5 billion in annual sales equaled 11% of Merck's revenues. When news of the recall broke, Merck shares plunged $12 to $33, wiping out $28 billion of stock value in one day for investors, pension funds and mutual funds.

$28 Billion? Thatsa lotta sheckels!

Hmmm. I know there's a lesson in here somewhere for pharmaceutical companies, shareholders, lawyers, pension fund managers, ambitious attorneys general.........

An Unconventional AIDS Patient

Dr. Donald Miller, an esteemed cardiac surgeon, recently reviewed, a book by Dr. Harvey Bialy, entitled, "Oncogenes, Aneuploidy and AIDS – A Scientific Life & Times of Peter H. Duesberg." Dr. Miller noted that a small cadre of scientists have questioned the official government position on AIDS, as well as the toxicity of some of the treatments regularly prescribed to patients. In this interview, I speak with Noreen Martin, a 50-year old, white, housewife from South Carolina, who was recently diagnosed with AIDS, but has since developed second thoughts about both the diagnosis, the treatment and medical paradigm

1. When were you first diagnosed HIV+?

In late 2003, when I just turned 50.

2. What did you know about AIDS at that time?

Oh boy, I was pretty ignorant. I believed, like most people, that HIV was transmitted by sex which causes AIDS and leads to death.

3. How did you react to the diagnosis?

Truthfully, I was relieved. I know this might sound strange. However, I had been extremely sick for months, had seen numerous doctors and continued to go downhill and no one knew why. They ran me through a gambit of tests to include numerous blood, arterial blood gas, CT, MRI, spinal tap, IV in my foot and 2 each excruciating, bone biopsies.

4. Were you surprised by the diagnosis?

Yes, quite surprised!

5. How was your health at the time of the diagnosis?

Wow, looking back, it’s a miracle that I am alive. As you see, I had the following: nausea, diarrhea, weight loss, hair loss, loss of short-term memory, thrush, low platelets and other blood anomalies, Epstein-Barr Virus, encephalitis, anemia, gerd, tachycardia, enlarged bile duct, abnormal liver enzymes, mood disorder, wheezing, heavy, labored breathing and more. At some point they said that I had been exposed to hepatitis C.

6. After being told you were HIV+, were you advised to take any AIDS drugs?

Yes, let me regress here. After being told that I was HIV positive, I was then placed on hold for 2 months before I was seen by the infectious, disease doctors. In the mean time, I could not just lie around and die, so I went to my favorite health store. The owner, a very special person, told me to go see a local, alternative doctor, which I did. This doctor placed me on a few supplements and administered 8 each, chelation treatments. These treatments helped me considerably because on the chelation days, I could at least get up off the couch.

When I finally made it to the infectious, disease doctors, they were not familiar with the previous chelation treatments and stated that I must stop these treatments if I wanted them to treat me. So I did. They called in the pharmacist and she instilled into me the importance of not missing any doses of medicines. They placed me on Viread, Sustiva, Lamivudine and the antibiotic Dapsone which I was on for over 1 year.

7. How long did you take the drugs?

I took the above regiment for approximately 15 months. I stopped these drugs for 6 weeks, only known to my husband. However, with tremendous pressure from my 3 doctors and husband, I reluctantly went on a second set of anti-virals. I wanted to come off the drugs, of course, my doctors did not agree with me. My young, resident doctor would generally go and get reinforcements, meaning the head doctor and pharmacist, to try to change my way of thinking. The only difference that I noticed after stopping the drugs is that my chronic fatigue started coming back. Could it have been some sort of drug withdrawal? This time I was placed on Lamivudine and a new drug which turned me very yellow and elevated my liver enzymes.

Forgive me if I may have forgotten a drug. I was taken off these and switched to Viread and Ritonavir which I was on for approximately 8 months. Oh, I almost forgot, one, little, pink pill which I don’’t recall its name. The second and last time, after having the last piece of the puzzle explained to me by Kary Mullis, In my heart, I knew that what I was about to do was the right thing to do. You see, I made up my mind, if I had to go it alone, so be it. I found that the human body has an innate ability to survive and the mind is a wonderful tool to block out bad memories. Most of my sicknesses, pills, tests, etc. are now a fast, moving blur, away from me. Whether these pills are addictive or not, I’ll let the chemist decide. However, they really are mentally addictive, especially since one is led to believe that one’s very existence depends on these pills. I found it somewhat difficult to break away from these “jelly beans” even though my mind told me to do so. This time, I did so well off of the medications, that my husband changed his mind about the situation. As you see, he is from Missouri and I had to show him!

8. You mentioned Dr. Kary Mullis, the famous Nobel Prize winner. What was he like?

I only communicated briefly with him via the email. Nevertheless, judging from his communication, he is extremely intelligent but able to speak on my level. His has a good sense of humor and speaks openly and honestly. He seems to be a very caring person and I will share with you one piece of advice that he gave me, "Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel."

9. Ok, so what were the side-effects of the AIDS drugs?

Different drugs had different side effects. For example, most gave me diarrhea and I had accidents in and outside of the house. With Sustiva, I could not eat much food, especially fatty foods. Once I made this mistake and it felt like I was extremely drugged. As stated earlier, one drug turned my skin greenish-yellow to include the whites of my eyes and inside my mouth. I wasn’’t outright told the side effects of these drugs. For example, my teeth were becoming yellow so I went to the dentist and paid $500 for teeth, whitening procedure. The dentist tried twice but it would not work. It was no fault of the dental procedure. After research, I discovered that every one of the first set of HAART and Dapsone were known to discolor the teeth. I was never told the effects of any of these drugs. Only when I questioned my primary, infectious, disease doctor about a specific side effect, would he reluctantly admit to it.

10. At any point, did you develop full-blown AIDS?

Yes, I had full blown AIDS several months prior to my HIV diagnosis. When the diagnosis was made in December of ‘03, the oncology department apparently missed the fact that I had full- blown AIDS. I had in fact several of the AIDS, defining diseases and my CD4 count were at 78. I attribute my bad health to a number of factors to include, past medical history/treatments, legal drugs, stress, health habits and specifically to the non-treatment of anemia, low platelets, abnormal blood problems and memory problems. Prior to developing AIDS and unbeknown to me, I had consecutive years of abnormal, blood results.

11. What did the doctors tell you about AIDS?

Not very much at the initial visit. However, later on when I became more educated and questioned them, I was told the standard responses –– HIV cause AIDS, take the anti-virals or you will get sick, you almost died……you’re CD4’’s are low. Nothing impressive, basically just the party line that you hear on t.v. or read in the papers.

12. What prognosis did they give you?

In fairness to the doctors, I was somewhat out of it at that time. I can only recall them saying that they could probably save my life. However, they told my husband that they could extend my life 10 to 12 years. On doing a good job, well, I am still alive. However, where I feel that they are lacking is in the diet, supplements and basic health habits of the patient department. I was never questioned about any of these things. If I had not taken upon myself to get educated in a hurry and start to change bad habits and incorporate new, better ones, I personally feel that I wouldn’t have recovered so fast, if at all.

13. Did any AIDS doctors discuss with you some of the competing theories of Drs. Duesberg and Bialy?

Ha, ha, ha, very funny, surely you jest! Of course not!

14. How did you family handle all this? Your husband? How is his health?

Shocked, relieved that I was getting better. My husband handled the situation quite well under the circumstances. He was a real trooper. He worked hard during the day managing his business while worrying about me. He took time off and was always there for all my doctor visits. He was my knight in shining armor, my prince. On chelation, therapy days, he would drive me to the clinic and lovingly place my house slippers on my feet so that I would be more comfortable in the recliners for the treatments which took 2 to 3 hours. We did, however, have some heated discussions about my coming off the drugs. I can understand his point of view, because he saw me sick and dying and the drugs may have helped, along with my supplements, herbs and vitamins. Nevertheless, in a very short period of time, 3 months, I was doing quite well and did not want to remain on these medications long term. My husband’s health is excellent. He is HIV negative.

15. What type of research did you do to learn about AIDS? Books? Papers? Internet?

I read every website that I could find about AIDS, pro and con. I ordered books and gave a copy of Christine Maggiore’s, wonderful book to my physicians. I emailed and spoke on the phone to various authors, reporters, attorney, scientist, HIV persons, AIDS persons, doctors, rethinkers and more.

16. How is your health today? What is your prognosis?

Today, my health is excellent. I attribute this to better, health habits, coming off the anti-virals, a positive attitude and a wonderful drug, LDN, low dose naltrenoxne. LDN was pioneered by Dr. Bihari from New York City for the treatment of immune, deficient diseases, including AIDS. I take one 4.5mg pill each night which wards off opportunist diseases by increasing the body’’s natural endorphin levels.. I feel that my prognosis is excellent now. However, when I see the infectious, disease doctors next month, they will surely tell me that my viral load is greater than 100,000 and that I need to go back on the anti-virals, the same old song and dance. I will just smile and say, no thank you I think that I’’ll sit this one out! This past week I had a routine, complete, blood count and this is the first time that my levels were pretty normal, including my liver enzymes. So, you decide!

17. What have you learned about AIDS that you didn't know before your diagnosis?

Wow, plenty! I learned a lot about politics, medicine, and my inner strength. I started a website devoted to health issues, noreenshealthdiner.com. so to help others

18. Any advice for HIV/AIDS patients?

Yes. About the anti-virals, to take or not to take them is a personal decision. Initially, they did help me. However, I did have side effects and my blood and liver levels stayed abnormal. What bothered me most was the damage that might not be so obvious. I think that these medications as with any medicines should only be used when absolutely necessary, to be used as a crutch to help with the healing process. My belief is that one cannot be medicated or vaccinated into health. These are only a small piece of the pie. I want others to know that there are those out there who will support them. One may be pulled and tugged like the tide. Nevertheless, do your homework, listen to and weigh all sides of issue. In the end, do what that inner voice says is the right thing to do, after all, it’s your life.

HIV Positive, But Not Ill?

Absolutely must-read story in the LA Times about researchers from San Francisco who are studying HIV+ positive folks who ain't sick. They used to be called, "Long-term non-progressors;" now they are called "Elite Controllers." To explain this phenomenom, these bean-counters scientific researchers are speculating that these folks have "defective viruses" or super-duper immune systems.

Au contraire, mon frere. Check out these choice tidbits from the 2 central characters of the piece: Matt Traywick and Kai Brothers:

Regarding Traywick:

Traywick was diagnosed 21 years ago and has been healthy ever since, despite never having taken anti-HIV medications

Regarding Brothers:

Not knowing his future, he quit his job and cashed in his 401(k) account to travel in Europe. On his return, he learned his infection-fighting T-cells — HIV's target — had dipped slightly below the normal range, and his doctor wrote him a prescription for AZT, the first effective HIV drug but one with often dreadful side effects.

Dreadful side effects!!! That's what we been saying ,folks!

"I decided I was not going to get it filled," Brothers recalled. "Something instinctively told me not to. I decided to wait it out."

Good for you! You probably just saved your own life.

Wait he did, and although his T-cells occasionally dipped, he also declined to use the effective multi-drug HIV cocktail when it became available in 1996. A man of moderate habits, Brothers took to practicing safe sex — although researchers think it unlikely that controllers can infect others, he has taken no chances — and listening more closely to his body when it requested food or rest or exercise.

Allright! Declined the cocktail too!

So, lemme summarize it for these genius researchers at UCSF and Massachusetts General Hospital.

THESE. FOLKS. ARE. HEALTHY. BECAUSE. THEY. DON'T. TAKE. AZT. OR. THE. COCKTAILS!

Ahh. I feel much better getting it off my chest!

Finally, a nice note from Dr. Jay Levy, who among the orthodox true believers has glimmers of compassion and common sense.

Essentially, controllers show that the human immune system is capable of containing HIV naturally, Levy said. "This has been a long time coming, but in my opinion we can look forward to long-term survival without toxic drugs."

You got that right, Jay.

More AIDS Fraud!

Well, we've already detailed how the unifying viral theory of AIDS (1 chimp virus=>29 unconnected diseases) was conceived in fraud by the wretched, Robert Gallo.

So, Gallo stole the virus from Montagnier, what's the big deal?

Well, as one smart feller once said, "it's like 2 bungling thieves fighting over fake diamonds!"

Substantively, though, Gallo claimed to have found the virus in 26 of 72 AIDS patients. Hmmm. I pause for reflection and employ my vast mathematical skills.

That's 36%.

So, What was causing AIDS in the other 64% of the patients?  And, Is finding  a virus in 36% of patients with disease X, sufficient to proclaim you found the cause of disease X?  Methinks, Not!

Anyway, the rot of AIDS corruption has now filtered down to AIDS "patients." Specifically, I note this ditzy broad, Casey Weierbach, who claimed she was raped and infected with HIV as a child, and spent the past 2 years giving all these do-gooder AIDS speeches to all these civic groups in Pennsylvannia -- for handsome pay, I might add.

Oops. All a lie. Madame Casey was recently charged with bilking $66,000 from the State for falsely claiming to have the disease.

My favorite part:

She also provided false information in 2004 and 2005 to at least three area doctors, one of whom became suspicious after Weierbach refused AIDS medications, according to an affidavit

Hell, at least she was smart enough to not take the drugs!

(Hat-tip from our pal, Johnny Blackman).