Does HIV exist? Does HIV cause AIDS?

hlat

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Can you ask whether the HIV virus exists? If yes, does the HIV virus cause AIDS?

What I took away from the book Virus Mania and the SOTT interview was that HIV does not exist at all, so that HIV does not cause AIDS.
Virus mania
The Health & Wellness Show: Interview with Virus Mania author Dr. Claus Köehnlein -- Sott.net

There was also some discussion here.
 
Can you ask whether the HIV virus exists? If yes, does the HIV virus cause AIDS?

What I took away from the book Virus Mania and the SOTT interview was that HIV does not exist at all, so that HIV does not cause AIDS.

I think that those who defend that it doesn't exist are basing their conclusions on their perspective about certain viral markers, viral genes and their expressions, and environmental factors. I think it is easy to interpret HIV several ways when so little was known about viruses in general and molecular biology. Now there's certainly more information, although one can get the gist of how little we still know by reading the current recommended reading in this forum.

After reading "The Mysterious World of the Human Genome" and "Virolution" by Frank Ryan, The Edge of Evolution by Behe and other books on viruses and genes, and after having several patients with HIV and AIDS, I think it is clear that the hypotheses which argue that HIV doesn't exist don't explain everything. The discussion in the H&W show was interesting because it considered other perspectives and factors often missed in main circles. However, it doesn't reflect my clinical experience and research. That is, for me it is clear that there's HIV and it has the natural history that is alleged to it.

I have patients with AIDS and have made thorough interviews to HIV positive patients as the first physician making the diagnosis. Sexual misconduct is one sure way to get HIV and a significant percentage of HIV positive people don't know that they are carriers. A person can be nutritionally fit, never tried drugs or strong medications in their life and be a pretty good athlete and seemingly a perfect life, and they'll still get HIV if they have risky sexual partners. And being HIV positive will surely mess up their immune system from that point onwards. I'm actually surprised how little AIDS is discussed during the last decade or so. And even when some people have mutations that protects them against the disease, they are still carriers, infecting others whose lives will definitely be affected by AIDS.
 
Session Transcript, February 22, 1995,

Q: (L) I would like to know for the benefit of somebody else who asked the question: What is the origin of AIDS?

A: Simian mutation.

Q: (L) A monkey virus, in other words.

A: Was, but mutated.

Q: (L) Who is the individual or group responsible for mutation?

A: Not humans.

Q: (L) Well then, who?

A: Lizards acting in conjunction with destined frequency path.

Q: (L) And what is the purpose of the infliction of the AIDS virus on the human race?

A: Not determined.
 
I'm actually surprised how little AIDS is discussed during the last decade or so.
I'm surprised that you'd find it surprising Gaby, given your intellect.

This disease is now a multi-billion dollar medically manageable profit centre. TPTB no doubt feel that there should be more well-off patients to help fatten this immunodraining golden goose and make more of the Western middle class hostages of the technosphere keeping them alive.
 
I was reading a book (in German) about that but never finished it because it became to technical for my knowledge. It was very interesting nonetheless, though I think I don't have it anymore:
There seems to be an english version as well:

Thanks for recommending this book, mrtn!
Judging from the reviews it sounds like an interesting read, especially because the author seems to go into the relevant details of biochemistry and the immunological processes involved.
 
IIRC he explains how in the 80s many of the AIDS cases are linked to certain drug usage in the homosexual scene and how much investment existed in cancer research as an impetus to link AIDS to that as a boost. He then explains in great detail how these disruptions of the immune system actually work, and that an actual AIDS virus has never been directly detected. At the time I also read on the internet about criticims of the official AIDS explanations. Things like the fact that you could have AIDS when tested in one country, and not when tested in another country, due to the different methods and thresholds of the indirect marker detection, made me really sceptical.
 
IIRC he explains how in the 80s many of the AIDS cases are linked to certain drug usage in the homosexual scene and how much investment existed in cancer research as an impetus to link AIDS to that as a boost. He then explains in great detail how these disruptions of the immune system actually work, and that an actual AIDS virus has never been directly detected. At the time I also read on the internet about criticims of the official AIDS explanations. Things like the fact that you could have AIDS when tested in one country, and not when tested in another country, due to the different methods and thresholds of the indirect marker detection, made me really sceptical.

Yes, these are exactly the points I've been reading about in articles and have watched in one specific documentary, I think it was House of Numbers. So if the book gives even more detailled data on the topic, as it seems from your and others' reviews, then that would be interesting, as it is with every such topic, where the official line deviates from the facts.

Yet, along similar lines as to what Gaby wrote above with her clinical experience and research, I also think the clinical picture does exist. The question remaining for me is the actual story of its development as well as understanding the actual mechanisms. If, as Gaby reports, there are also patients who have a seemingly healthy life style (assuming they're honest in the anamnesis) and they still get the same set of symptoms as those who've been immersed in a life style of drugs, strong medication, sexual misconduct, then that would be a contradiction to what the researchers state, who say there's no such thing as HIV, because they do lead it back to a negative life style of above mentioned factors. One of their main argument, as far as I currently know, is that the full-blown syndrome only occured because of the medication given to the patients diagnosed with HIV, i.e. that the clinical picture of AIDS is a result of the medications' side effects - which wouldn't be surprising.

So we have this medication that brings a lot of income to Big Pharma, and, as it stands nowadays, the official line, as with so many other medical conditions, is something along the lines of: 'See, there's no cure, you're simply unlucky because you contracted the virus, but fear not, we have this special medication that's going to prolong your life, and well, yeah, it's a little expensive (and it makes the cash tills ringing over here big time) and yeah, there may be some side effects, but don't concern yourself with that'.

Apparently, the author of the book mrtn mentioned, also gives recommendation as to a therapy with NAC and gluthathione in high doses, which is supposed to reset the immune system to proper functioning, but I can't comment on this yet, so I'd rather first like to read the book.
 
One of their main argument, as far as I currently know, is that the full-blown syndrome only occured because of the medication given to the patients diagnosed with HIV, i.e. that the clinical picture of AIDS is a result of the medications' side effects - which wouldn't be surprising.

That is pretty selective. I think these documentaries and books should be balanced with "Virolution" and "The Mysterious World of the Human Genome" by Frank Ryan, "Darwin's Black Box" and "The Edge of Evolution" by Behe. It will give people an idea of how much we learned within the last years and how much we still don't know.

People are diagnosed with HIV after the fact. No need to blame Big Pharma's drugs in this one when clearly some never even heard of the drugs or any drugs when they were diagnosed. I remember a "healthy" young man who was married and was fit to run a marathon. The X-Ray of his chest infection was so bizarre and the result of his infection even stranger - Pneumocystis jirovecii, which never affects someone whose immune system is OK. He was tested for HIV and it was positive. Further tests revealed the affliction of his immune system and his viral load. Up to that point, he never tried antiretrovirals. He got AIDS before he ever took any drug.

Again, see "Virolution" and "The Mysterious World of the Human Genome" by Frank Ryan, and "Darwin's Black Box" and "The Edge of Evolution" by Behe.
 
I was reading a book (in German) about that
That's interesting because the German Supreme Court has something to say about viruses:
 
In a post of @Voyageur in the 2019-nCoV thread there were some interesting statements that I've read about before and I still wonder why these procedures were not taken or if that has changed by now?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lys
Back
Top Bottom