If you would like to come on the show please send us an email! TNRA is always looking for interesting new stories.

Comment from Christian Fiala
Time January 25, 2010 at 12:43 am

Congratulations for this interview.
You may also be interested in the point: Aids: are we being deceived? at: http://www.nrc.nl/international/Opinion/article1984104.ece/AIDS_are_we_being_deceived

Christian Fiala, MD, PhD
Vienna, Austria

Comment from Sabretruthtiger
Time January 25, 2010 at 10:02 pm

Unfortunately Duesberg makes some assertions that are wrong and there are HIV patients who do not engage in drugs and have a healthy lifestyle who develop AIDS.
How does he explain those?

A large prospective study followed a group of 715 homosexual men in the Vancouver, Canada area; approximately half were HIV-seropositive or became so during the follow-up period, and the remainder were HIV-seronegative. After more than 8 years of follow-up, despite similar rates of drug use, sexual contact, and other supposed risk factors in both groups, only the HIV-positive group suffered from opportunistic infections. Similarly, CD4 counts dropped in the patients who were HIV-infected, but remained stable in the HIV-negative patients, in spite of similar rates of risk behavior.[13] The authors concluded that “the risk-AIDS hypothesis… is clearly rejected by our data”, and that “…The evidence supports the hypothesis that HIV-1 has an integral role in the CD4 depletion and progressive immune dysfunction that characterise AIDS.”[13]
Similarly, the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) and the Women’s Interagency HIV Study (WIHS) — which between them observed more than 8,000 Americans — demonstrated that “…the presence of HIV infection is the only factor that is strongly and consistently associated with the conditions that define AIDS.”[14] A 2008 study found that recreational drug use (including marijuana, cocaine, poppers and amphetamines) had no effect on CD4 or CD8 T-cell counts, providing further evidence against a role of recreational drugs as a cause of AIDS.[15]

I would like to believe HIV as the cause of AIDS is a scam but the evidence doesn’t seem to back it up, unless all the data is falsified (which considering Global Warming and 911 wouldn’t surprise me normally but this is readily available and extensive evidence)

Until they can cite a study where a group comprised entirely of HIV patients, half who use recreational drugs and engage in anal sex and have an unhealthy life style, and half who don’t, and the risky lifestyle members all get AIDS and the oher half doesn’t, then I’m afraid the Duesberg hypothesis is wrong.

Comment from Hereward
Time January 25, 2010 at 10:17 pm

Hi Sabretruth, and thanks for your comment. There is an underlying problem with your terms of reference. The terms “AIDS” and “HIV positive” are assumed by you to have clear definitions - however the reality could not be farther from the case. THis goes to the heart of the whole problem and it is the reason for Brent’s film. Duesberg is not held up by Brent as having the answer - he provides one opinion in a spectrum of opinion.

AIDS is a very messy and difficult subject to discuss because the basic underlying science has been so corrupted.

You can be HIV positive in one country and negative in another. That is because the tests are not uniform.

The same can be said for an AIDS diagnosis. People can be diagnosed with AIDS just because of a low T-cell count even without any other symptoms.

If you present with tuberculosis and you are HIV negative, it is called tuberculosis. If you are HIV positive, it is called AIDS.

This is all compounded by the fact that the medicines are so toxic and can produce the very symptoms of AIDS.

The study you referenced would be useful only if the sero-positive group stayed off the anti-retrovirals. This of course never happens.

Comment from Bradfield Resident
Time January 27, 2010 at 3:32 am

I was curious about the location of the first document under Related Links (HIV-AIDS hypothesis out of touch with South African AIDS – A new perspective). After reading the paper I checked the digital object identifier (DOI) hyperlink for citing the paper, doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.06.024, which forwards to a page on sciencedirect.com showing that the article has been withdrawn.

“This Article-in-Press has been withdrawn pending the results of an investigation.

“The editorial policy of Medical Hypotheses makes it clear that the journal considers “radical, speculative, and non-mainstream scientific ideas”, and articles will only be acceptable if they are “coherent and clearly expressed.” However, we have received serious expressions of concern about the quality of this article, which contains highly controversial opinions about the causes of AIDS, opinions that could potentially be damaging to global public health. Concern has also been expressed that the article contains potentially libelous material.

“Given these important signals of concern, we judge it correct to investigate the circumstances in which this article came to be published online. When the investigation and review have been completed we will issue a further statement. Until that time, the article has been removed from all Elsevier databases.

“The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy.”

It is indicated that the article was “Available online 19 July 2009″, but not when it was withdrawn nor what the status of the investigation is.

Comment from Sabretruthtiger
Time January 28, 2010 at 1:00 am

I appreciate the problems with the definitions and the problems you mention with the fact that nowadays virtually everyone diagnosed is on the meds, but the study I cited doesn’t mention that they were on retrovirals, the test wouldn’t be of any use if they were.

I’m concerned about the documented cases of people who refuse to take the meds due to either a dislike of mainstream western medicine or because they believe the Duesberg hypothesis and they die, despite the fact that they live healthy lives.

I’m not saying you or Duesberg are wrong, I’m merely saying that there seems to be evidence that contradicts it. There is the possibility that the people who died not taking the meds were set up or killed by the Govt/big pharma to make it look like AIDS to end the debate (I wouldn’t put it past them) but I still need more evidence.

It’s just a pity that the medical establishment is entirely corrupted, it’s virtually impossible at the moment to prove the HIV AIDS connection false, here’s hoping that the political situation changes thanks in no small part to great sites like 911oz and your work Hereward.

Comment from Hereward
Time January 28, 2010 at 8:55 am

I would like to see a study specifically created to monitor the long term health of HIV+ people who don’t take the retrovirals (or other recreational drugs).

I think Duesberg is isolated in his opinion that an HIV+ test has zero diagnostic value.

The question in many people’s minds is what does the HIV+ result really mean?

For example, it may be an indicator of some health risk based on correlation rather than causation as there are many cases of HIV+ people leading perfectly healthy lives off the drugs. There are also cases of non-medicated HIV+ people like Christine Maggiore dying from conditions considered to be AIDS indicators.

However, unless the construct “HIV+” is more rigorously defined it seems that there is little chance of getting any good research results. You would want to know exactly which test they did (western blot, eliza etc..) and then you would want to plot those results against their ongoing health.

Comment from S
Time February 1, 2010 at 10:39 am

As a person diagnosed 19 years ago as HIV+ and does not take medications in Sydney I thank you for bringing this subject into the awareness of more people.

Please also be aware that doctors are not willing to study us or follow our alternative approach therefore giving a false perspective of statistics. (Just because that we are not in studied does not mean we do not exist.) Personally I found the only way I could continue with alternative therapies without being constantly pressured to take drugs was to discontinue seeing HIV specialists as have other people I know.

The image engrained in peoples minds of a skeleton AIDS victim was when AZT was heavily prescribed…luckily I only took AZT for one month in 1992 then stopped or I would have been added to their AIDS statistics. (Doctors now except that AZT was too toxic but always use the “ but we did the best we could at the time’ defence.) There are many good intentioned Doctors out there but risk being struck off unless they follow the orthodoxy.

The only ammunition they have in convincing people to take the toxic medication is the FEAR of becoming an AZT victim. Before AZT the cause of immune deficiency in AIDS patients was 1. Overly prescribed antibiotics taken to sustain constant sexual/ viral infections caused by promiscuous lifestyles.2. Heavy recreational drug use. These days the drugs are less toxic thus taking longer to show side effects. Show me a person who has visual effects of HIV – lipodystrophy, premature ageing, bloating, wasting etc and I’ll show you a person on meds. These days liver failure is a major cause of death. This did not occur before simply because the drugs were so toxic their entire bodies failed.

I was around in the epidemic and watched 1000’s of beautiful people wither away. 100’s were friends who I had lengthy discussions with at the time. The only difference between these people and me was that I did not blindly follow my doctor’s advice. I now look forward to living long enough to see the end of this medical madness. These people did not die in vain. Their deaths will eventually help expose the larger pharma fraud.

S