top of page
Purple - Blue Gradient
Search
Writer's pictureThirdEye INFINITE∞
Oct 19, 201810 min read

HIV Does Not Cause AIDS

Updated: Dec 11, 2018



10 scientific arguments are presented why HIV cannot cause AIDS:


This is a clip from "HIV=AIDS: Fact or Fraud?" In this clip dr. Duesberg is being interviewed. Dr. Duesberg (full Professor at University of California, Berkeley) is perhaps the best retrovirologist in the world. He discovered the oncogene (the gene that causes cancer) and he decoded for the first time the genome of retro-viruses, creating a map that is used by every retro-virologist in the world researching retroviruses.


In this clip 10 scientific arguments are presented why HIV cannot cause AIDS. Arguments/questions that haven't been answered till today. Dr. Duesberg is not alone. Top scientists and Nobel Prize winners agree with him, like: dr. Rasnick, that discovered the protease inhibitors that are being used as HIV drugs. Dr Mullis a nobel prize winner, invented the PCR, the method being used to detect viruses (including HIV). Richard Strohman, professor at the department of Cell Biology in University of California, Berkeley. Nobel prize winner dr. Walter Gilbert from Harvard University and dr. Charles Thomas, a Molecular Biologist and former Professor of Biochemistry at Harvard University.



Professor Luc Montagnier, 2009 Nobel Laureate for the discovery of HIV, reveals his views on the treatment of HIV and its relationship to nutrition and profit with House of Numbers documentary Director, Brent Leung and admits that HIV Can Be Cleared Out from the body Naturally:



AIDS IS JUST A BIG HOAX AND SCAM AND GIVES GREAT PROFITS TO BIG PHARMA EACH YEAR!



At some point the HIV/AIDS establishment will no longer be able to keep a lid on the fact that the HIV theory is wrong. Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the polymerase chain reaction used to measure HIV “viral load,” puts it this way:


“Years from now, people will find our acceptance of the HIV theory of AIDS as silly as we find those who excommunicated Galileo.” And the medical profession will look back regretfully for having prescribed toxic antiretroviral drugs to people who were “HIV-positive.”


The AIDS establishments have spent the last twenty years focusing on the HIV and not on the real causes of AIDS. The correct approach for investigating the cause(s) of a disease is by evaluating all medical evidence that considers infectious, chemical, nutritional, and metabolic factors. As a pathologist and a toxicologist, I evaluated the published literature on the worldwide AIDS epidemic and found that HIV does not cause AIDS.


“Get All the Facts: HIV Does Not Cause AIDS”


Dr. Mohammed Ali Al-Bayati explains in his book “Get All the Facts: HIV Does Not Cause AIDS”, the multifactorial causes of AIDS in the world and explained the pathogenesis of AIDS in different risk groups [Mohammed Ali Al-Bayati, 'Get All The Facts: HIV does not cause AIDS' Toxi-Health International, Dixon CA 1999, 183 pages ISBN 0-9673536-0-2].



His findings include:


1) The HIV-hypothesis is not supported. HIV is a harmless virus in both the in vivo and the in vitro settings. There is no actual proof that HIV causes AIDS.


2) AIDS in drug users and homosexuals in the U.S. and Europe is actually caused by the heavy ancillary use of glucocorticoids and other immunosuppressive agents to medically treat the wide range of chronic serious illnesses of the respiratory system, gastrointestinal system, and other organs, malnutrition, release of endogenous cortisol, and opportunistic infections in these persons. The appearance of "AIDS" in the U.S. and Europe has coincided with the approval of glucocorticoid aerosoll use in 1976, the introduction of crack cocaine, the use of heroin by inhalation, and the use of alkyl nitrites by homosexuals to enhance sexual activities.


3) AIDS in hemophiliacs is related to the use of corticosteroids and other immunosuppressive agents to prevent the development of antibodies for factors VIII and IX and to treat other chronic illnesses such as joint disease.


4) AIDS in people receiving blood and/or tissue is related to the use of glucocorticoids to prevent reactions of transfusion and tissue rejection, and to treat other illnesses.


5) AIDS in infants and children is caused by their exposure to drugs and corticosteroids in utero and their exposure to corticosteroids used after birth to treat their chronic illnesses.


6) AIDS in Africa is caused by malnutrition, release of endogenous cortisol, and opportunistic diseases. Atrophy in the lymphoid tissue in people suffering from malnutrition has been known since 1925. Malnutrition causes severe atrophy in the thymus and lymphoid organs and impairs the function of the T cells.

These changes are reversible by feeding. The size of the thymus in malnourished children increased from 20% of normal to 107% of normal, following nine weeks of feeding.


7) Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) and lymphoma are induced by the use of steroids and drugs, and the release of endogenous cortisol. They are not caused by a slow virus. KS is reversible upon the termination of treatment with immunosuppressive agents prior to metastasis.


8) The medications currently used to treat patients with AIDS, such as AZT, protease inhibitors, and glucocorticoids, are highly toxic. They can even cause AIDS in asymptomatic patients, and make the disease worse in patients with AIDS. These drugs do not have any therapeutic value, and their use must be discontinued immediately.


9) Damage to the immune system is rapidly reversible after removal of the true insulting agent or treatment of the true causes. For example. a) The CD4+ T cells of 1075 HIV+ pregnant women increased from 426/uL to 596/uL in six months by giving these women a balanced diet. This also improved the outcome of their pregnancy; and b) The reduction in CD4+ T cells in HIV+ homosexuals was also reversed by the cessation of treatment with glucocorticoids.


10) There's been a lot of registered cases from terminally ill patients with AIDS that show that they are HIV Negative after getting tested. Meaning that there's not a real correlation between the deadly disease and the HIV virus. This patients might have never been contaged with HIV and still got AIDS.


My findings have been reviewed and supported by scientists and physicians. Below are the links to some of these articles and reviews:



Article wrote by pathologist and toxicologist: Mohammed Ali Al-Bayati.



Other Resources:



HIV is a Harmless Passenger Virus:


Modern medicine has spawned great things like open heart surgery and corneal transplants, but it also harms people when its practitioners follow treatment guidelines based on fallacious theories and win bribes from big pharma. My grandson became gravely ill when he was 2 months old after his heart and kidneys started to fail. Studies showed that he had an underdeveloped aortic arch that restricted blood flow to most of his body, known as hypoplasia of the transverse aortic arch. A surgeon (a colleague of mine at the University of Washington) operated on him, placing this 10-lb. infant on a heart-lung machine, cooling him to a low temperature and then draining out his blood. With the machine turned off and no blood circulating through the body—for 19 minutes—to obscure what he needed to do, the surgeon enlarged the aortic arch by stitching a (pericardial) patch onto it. Now, three years later, this fortunate child is a healthy, active little boy and is developing normally.


In contrast, the medical outcome will be quite different for a person who tests positive for HIV (human immunodeficiency virus), like can happen when a civic-minded, healthy person volunteers to donate blood and is found to be “HIV-positive.” With this test in hand, a health care provider (i.e., physician) will shove this shocked individual down a rabbit hole into an alternate medical world festooned with acronyms like CD4, ART, HIV RNA, HIV Ag/Ab, NRTI, NNRTI, PI, INSTI, PrEP, and P4P4P; one that adheres to treatments set down in a 285-page Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected Adults and Adolescents.[1]


Following these government-issued guidelines, the provider will start this healthy blood donor on antiretroviral therapy (ART), even if his or her CD4 count (the number of CD4 T-cell lymphocytes per cubic millimeter of blood, a measure of immunity) is normal (>500). For the last two decades the standard for treating “HIV infection” is a three-drug protocol—“2 nukes and a third drug.” The “nukes” are nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI), DNA chain terminators like AZT. The “third drug” is a non-NRTI (NNRTI), a protease inhibitor (PI), or an integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI).[2]


These antiretroviral drugs are very toxic. With prolonged use they can cause cardiovascular disease, liver damage, premature aging (due to damage of mitochondria), lactic acidosis, gallstones (especially with protease inhibitors), cognitive impairment, and cancer. The majority of people who take them experience unpleasant side effects, like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea wrongly thinking that is because of the HIV virus. AZT (retrovir), the most powerful “nuke” in the ART arsenal, actually killed some 150,000 “HIV-positive” people when it started being used in 1987 until it was stopped in the mid-1990s.[3] When an “HIV-positive” person on long-term ART gets cardiovascular disease or cancer, doctors blame the virus for helping cause these diseases. Substantial evidence, however, supports the opposite conclusion: it is the antiretroviral treatment itself that causes cancer, liver damage, cardiovascular and other diseases in these patients. In them, these are iatrogenic diseases. (Iatro is the Greek work for physician and iatrogenic is the subtle term the medical profession likes to use when admitting that a physician’s treatment or diagnostic procedure caused the disease in question.)


Medical authorities claim that HIV causes AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome), with its constellation of 26 diseases. To cement this truth in the public’s mind, the human immunodeficiency virus is no longer just called “HIV.” It is now called “HIV/AIDS.” If the HIV theory of AIDS is true, then even with their side effects and toxicity, a 3-drug regimen of ART would be the right treatment for an HIV-positive person. Indeed, a new development in HIV care called preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), promotes universal coverage with antiretroviral drugs to prevent HIV infections, based on the tenet that “treatment is prevention.” Given their unpleasant side effects, however, people stop taking their antiretroviral drugs. One answer for that in the HIV care world is addressed by its P4P4P acronym (pay for performance for patients). With P4P4P, now under study, patients are given financial incentives to encourage them to keep taking the drugs.[2]


Stepping outside this world and examining the HIV theory of AIDS with an open mind, one sees that this theory has numerous flaws.


Among them, a key feature in the HIV/AIDS theory is that the virus is sexually transmitted. It turns out, however, that only 1 in 1,000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits HIV. Prostitutes do not become “HIV-positive,” despite their line of work, as long as they stay off drugs. One in 275 Americans is “HIV-positive.” Therefore, with this prevalence of HIV in the population the average uninfected U.S. citizen would need to have 275,000 random unprotected “sexual contacts” to get HIV.


According to this theory, HIV causes immunodeficiency by killing T cell lymphocytes (one kind of white blood cell that plays a key role in cell-mediated immunity). But T cells grown in test tubes infected with HIV do not die. They thrive. And they produce large quantities of the virus that laboratories use to detect antibodies to HIV in a person’s blood. This virus infects less than 1 in every 500 T cells in the body and thus are hard to find. The HIV test detects antibodies to it, not the virus itself. For these and other reasons there is a growing body of evidence that shows the HIV theory of AIDS to be untenable.


A positive HIV test does not necessarily mean one is infected with this virus. Hepatits B vaccine and Flu shots are but two of some 70 non-health-threatening things that can cause a false-positive HIV test. A positive test may simply indicate that one’s immune system has become damaged, for whatever reason, as will occur with malnutrition and heavy recreational drug use.


Henry Bauer, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry and Science Studies and former Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Virginia Tech, presents a concisely reasoned refutation of the HIV/AIDS theory in a 28-page, online study, “The Case Against HIV,” with 51 pages of references—896 of them. (He continually updates it.)[3] A classic paper on AIDS is “The Chemical Bases of the Various AIDS Epidemics: Recreational Drugs, Anti-viral Chemotherapy, and Malnutrition” by Peter Duesberg, Claus Koehnlein, and David Rasnick, published in the Journal of Biosciences in 2003.[4] Books that I recommend reading on this subject are listed in the “Reading List” below.


Practicing heart surgery for 40 years and performing some 7,000 open heart operations, I used a lot of bank blood during my career. Recently retired, I have signed up with the Red Cross to donate blood now every two months. In the unlikely event that I should test “HIV-positive,” I would never let anyone push me down the HIV/AIDS rabbit hole. No way. Knowing beyond a reasonable doubt that the HIV theory is fallacious and that HIV does not cause AIDS, I would never consent to “treatment” with antiretroviral drugs.


HIV is a passenger virus. It is a harmless hitchhiker coming along for the ride. Antiretroviral treatment harms people. Adhering to the erroneous theory that HIV causes AIDS, the billions of dollars the U.S. government spends annually on HIV/AIDS programs and research ($29.7 Billion for fiscal year 2014) is a waste of money. It fleeces taxpayers and enriches the drug companies that make antiretroviral drugs and the HIV/AIDS medical establishment. The annual cost of HIV care averages $25,000-$30,000 per patient, of which 67%-70% is spent on antiretroviral drugs.[2]


Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis (1818-1865), described as the “savior of mothers,” sought to reduce the high incidence of maternal mortality, from puerperal sepsis, by getting his colleagues to wash their hands, especially after coming out of the autopsy lab, before delivering babies. He advocated this practice before the importance of antisepsis became known. The medical community of the day felt insulted, rejected his advice, and scorned him. Telling HIV/AIDS doctors that they should stop giving antiretroviral drugs to their “HIV-positive” patients and that this would enable them to lead more healthy lives is like telling doctors in the 19th century that if they would only wash their hands before they delivered babies, maternal mortality would drop substantially (from more than 10% without hand-washing to less than 1%).


The Ignaz Semmelweis of HIV/AIDS is Peter Duesberg (b. 1936). In 1970 he was lauded for defining biochemically the first retroviral oncogene (with coworker Peter Vogt), in birds. He was a rising star of Nobel-prize potential in virology research until he published a paper in Science in 1987 titled “HIV is Not the Cause of AIDS.” After that he became a pariah with the HIV/AIDS establishment but nevertheless has continued to do seminal work in both AIDS and cancer research. (For more on Dr. Duesberg see my LRC article on him, titled “A Modern-Day Copernicus: Peter H. Duesberg.”)


(More fallacies in modern medicine to follow.)


References


118 views0 comments

Comments

bottom of page