In mid February of 2005, there was a weeklong meeting of something called the HIV Prevention Trials Network, a central organ of DAIDS, focusing, like so many of these seemingly infinite branches and subdivisions and working groups of the AIDS research industry, to eradicate HIV around the planet, in people born or not yet born, HIV positive, or “pre-exposed,” (HIV negative.)
Just the titles of the presentations speaks volumes about its mindset, and its chilling quality of paternalistic zeal, colonial sex-phobia, and the expectation that any “at risk” populations anywhere in the world should feel lucky, (and they even use the word “lucky”) to submit to their creepy experiments.
Look at these titles: “Reconsidering Microbicide Eligibility
Criteria,” “Lessons Learned in recruiting IDU populations,” ”Opportunities and
Challenges in reducing heterosexual HIV transmission: Condoms, anti-retroviral
chemoprophylaxis, HSV-2 control and male circumcision,” “Sexual behaviors in
women participating in HPTN trials,” “Anticipating the efficacy of HIV
pre-exposure prophylaxis,” and “HIVNET/HPTN 024: HIV incidence among infants
born HIV negative.” (?)
The literature of AIDS research has its own euphemistic language, which has evolved over time to imbue negative phenomena with a positive tinge and wrap just about any horror in a calm, clinical vernacular. In a 2004 paper published in the journal AIDS it was reported, coolly, that “All 4 classes of anti-retrovirals (ARVs) and all 19 FDA approved ARVs have been directly or indirectly associated with life-threatening events and death.” The paper was titled “Grade 4 Events Are as Important as AIDS Events in the Era of HAART,” and “Grade 4 Events” referred to “serious or life-threatening events.” The study looked at 2947 patients between 1996 and 2001 and its stated objective was, “To estimate incidence and predictors of serious or life threatening events that are not AIDS defining, and death among patients treated with highly active antiretrovial therapy (HAART) in the setting of 5 large multi-center randomized treatment trials conducted in the United States.”
First, the conclusion: More than twice as many people (675) had a drug related (Grade 4) life threatening event as an AIDS “event” (332.) The most common causes of grade 4 events (drug toxicities) were “liver related.” The greatest risk of death was not an AIDS “event” but a drug event—heart attacks. (“Cardiovascular events.”)
And what is the response, the manifestation, of this shocking data that should have sent the doctors screaming down the corridors at the realization that they’d been somehow duped into killing patients with ‘life-saving’ drugs?
It is a response that can only be understood inside the culture of AIDS, which has granted itself the privilege of openly killing its patients as an extension of the ever expanding AIDS research effort. Death is incorporated now, whether by drugs or anything else, because the whole thing is is a floating research lab of infinite questions.
And “challenges” and “lessons learned.”
Except they are never learned because there is never a sane reaction—everything is folded in.
Listen carefully to the language here, in the study author’s “discussion” of their “findings:” It contains the DNA for the AIDS mentality.
“Our finding is that the rate of grade 4 events is greater than the rate of AIDS events, and that the risk of death associated with these grade 4 events was very high for many events. Thus the incidence of AIDS fails to capture most of the morbidity experienced by patients with HIV infection prescribed HAART.” (Italics mine)
In plain English, AIDS drugs cause AIDS and death far more effectively than “AIDS” itself. AIDS “fails to capture most of the morbidity…”
At no point is there any suggestion that therefore, AIDS drugs should be recalled. Imagine a study that spells out that a COX-2 inhibitor, like Vioxx kills patients outright.
In the rest of the known medicinal universe, death is still considered a negative, a failure.
Not in AIDS.
In AIDS, death is just another tiny milestone in gaining a better “understanding” of the drugs, who, like chemical Gods, deserve our perpetual human sacrifices at their altar.
© 2006 Celia Farber
Swedish born
Celia Farber is widely known "as the world's most dangerous AIDS
reporter". Serious
Adverse Events: An Uncensored History of AIDS,
a selection of over 20 years of writing, in a tradition that includes
George Orwell and Hunter Thompson, has recently been published by
Melville House.
Comments