NEW EVIDENCE THAT AIDS WAS SPREAD DELIBERATELY

There have long been allegations that the rapid spread of AIDS, both in Africa and in the United States, was originally precipitated by various vaccine programs. A new investigation shows conclusively that HIV infection among San Francisco gay men was a result of contaminated vaccines.

If this contamination was intentional, it would represent the worst assault in American history, and probably in human history. The truth must be determined, and justice must be done.

There is strong reason to believe that the HIV contamination of the vaccines was intentional. Studies were performed to determine whether HIV could have accidentally survived the vaccine production methods. These studies showed that all traces of HIV would have been easily destroyed, without human intervention.

It does not matter whether HIV is a product of nature, or has long existed. Anthrax is also natural, and has long existed. It can, and has, also been turned into a weapon and used intentionally. The same may be true of HIV.

The "Ames" strain of anthrax, used in recent terror assaults, is a product of U.S. military labs. It may have been stolen by terrorists, or perhaps the development program was infiltrated by a mole working for some hostile foreign power.

Whether it was the work of terrorists, or hate groups, or renegades within our own government, needs to be investigated.

Demonstrating the link of HIV to the experimental vaccines is a very commonplace type of statistical analysis. It is the same principle as determining whether a vaccine is working, or produces sides effects. Two professors specializing in statistics have confirmed the validity of the methodology in this study. The full analysis can be viewed at:

http://www.bhc.edu/eastcampus/leeb/aids/aidtesk.htm (dead)

All concerned persons should try to learn about this issue, and help to raise a voice.

ABSTRACT

This statistical study concerns what is probably one of the most significant and overlooked issues of our time. It demonstrates proof of a strong link between the U.S. outbreak of AIDS, and hepatitis studies that were performed on gay males, starting in the late 1970s. The analysis refutes explanations that attribute the connection simply to sexual risk behavior on the part of the study participants.

The analysis also presents evidence suggesting that HIV infections occurring in the studies were more likely to have been intentional rather than accidental. This raises the question of whether the men in these studies might have been used as guinea pigs for covert experimentation, or whether a sexually-transmitted epidemic might have been deliberately induced, as a means to rid society of "undesirables". Regardless of whether the virus itself came into existence naturally, its initial spread was clearly unnatural.

The methodology used in this document is highly similar to that which is typically used to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccines. The analysis evaluates differences in infection rates between a suitable control group, versus a vaccine test group.

In the first two years of the epidemic in San Francisco, between 50 and 60 percent of the earliest known AIDS cases were from persons involved in the hepatitis studies. A goal of this analysis is to calculate specific probabilities for these and other similar figures. It demonstrates that such figures cannot credibly be attributed merely to chance, or to differences in risk behaviors.

Odds of the disproportionate levels of HIV infection among men in the vaccine trial, relative to other men of similar risk behaviors, are shown to be as little as 1 in a trillion.

A statistical link exists not only to experimental vaccines, but also simply to the fact of participation in the hepatitis studies, such as simply to have blood drawn for purposes of monitoring hepatitis prevalence. Few logical or benign possibilities exist to explain why there should be such a connection, yet it exists. Odds against the higher initial rate of AIDS among study participants was as little as 1 in 300,000, when compared to men of equal or higher risk.

Various epidemiological anomalies also suggest that an artificial, simultaneous, mass-infection would have been necessary in order to produce the type of explosion in HIV that was observed in the early 1980s. Full-blown AIDS should have been evident many years earlier, before HIV was nearly so widespread Thousands of infections would have been necessary to fuel the levels of HIV growth that were observed, during years in which no retroactive evidence of HIV exists.

These anomalies are analyzed using computer modeling software.

http://forums.questioningaids.com/showthread.php?6859-Dr-Robert-Willner-Injects-quot-HIV-quot-into-himself-on-TV/page4

http://cleanhandss.blogspot.com/2009/09/robert-willner-el-famoso-dedo-del-sida.html

Dr. Robert Willner physician with over 40 years of experience, was known to belong to the dissenting view of a group of people who never believed the HIV virus was the cause of AIDS. Author of two books "The solution to cancer" and "Deadly Deception" (Deadly Deception).

On the back of "Deadly Deception," the author conveys a message comovedor.

He says: "Day after day continue to be healthy individuals diagnosed as "positive" HIV test for a totally inaccurate. Then pora disease are treated with the drug AZT nonexistent (Zidovudeina). This drug was outlawed 30 years ago by its high toxicity.

"Deadly Deception" (Deadly Deception) is an easy reading book mandatory for anyone diagnosed with HIV or not, whose foundations are consistent base with Peter Duesberg.

In one chapter of "Deadly Deception" is recounted an experience worth telling. The following is a summary.

In July 1993 Dr. Robert Willner was invited by a friend who lived in Costa Teguise, one of Lanzarote (Spain). Through an unusual circumstance, he met a brilliant woman Marisa Caceres, whose ethics and analytical skills, led to a chain of events that shook Spain.

After reading the manuscript Marisa Caceres almost finished this book, made an appointment to meet Dr. Robert Willner with Andres Pallares, responsible editor of the weekly news Lanzarotede. Andrés was reluctant to talk to a doctor who claimed HIV does not exist. But Marisa was challenged and eventually had lunch at Playa de Famara, after two hours of conversation, the editor was convinced.

On September 25, 1993, was published in throw the first of four artículos. Marisa organized a conference to the public, he agreed and was responsible for the simultaneous translation.

At the conference were invited Marisa Pedro Tocino which had seen a television program Española.Pedro arrived Sunday October 10 with a manuscript of a book he had written, government documents and fought against the doctor tells history government health system, due to their laxity in allowing contaminated blood transfusions were used and blamed AZT.

Peter was a gentle man, seemed to look with their eyes in disbelief that after years of hard and lonely battle, a doctor of habiera parte.Padecia mild hemophilia, so tested positive to HIV testing and had been slowly poisoned by AZT.

On the morning of October 13, 1993, Dr. Robert Willner pondered how I could effectively create a doubt in the minds of an audience to whom he had been brainwashed with lies for ten years, he remembered a comment made by Peter Duesberg, renowned microbiologist who gave a lecture in 1989, said it would take an injection of the HIV virus if he could be sure that did not contain any other ingredient and Peter exceción of the hemophiliac and having been treated with AZT was a healthy man.

After obtaining the consent of Peter to help him in his experiment and to end the conference, in front of the cameras, Peter stuck a needle into a finger until it is completely covered with blood, then Dr. Robert Willner introduced the same hypodermic needle deep into one of the fingers of your hand.

Photos and story appeared in every major newspaper in Spain. Calling for the condemnation of the government officials and threats of actions legales. Dr. Robert Willner knew the government could not run the risk of exponerses court of justice, but the responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry and drug traffickers.

Studies fraudulent company Burroughs-Wellcome come to light, the company could be bankrupted by lawsuits and their officials could be subject to charges criminales.Si addicts and potential drug users knew that was the drug that causes the AIDS could also cost billions of dollars in illegal drug trade.

Several television networks called Dr. Robert Willner with petitions to be filed with the cámaras. Marisa Dr. Robert Willner wisely advised the government to run the experiment Negri in their stations, would be controlled and would not be fair. It accepted the request of the private channel Antena-3 in the morning show "all right" leader of audience in Spain at that time, directed and presented by Pepe Navarro.

Marisa negotiated the appearance, accompanied Dr. Robert Willner to Madrid in order to translate clearly and that nothing was said out malinterpretado. Pidiendo only for expenses and that he could review the questions before the show. The direction of the program in turn asked the Dr. Robert Willner availability to perform the experiment again with the puncture of the blood of Pedro Tocino for the camera.

On October 20 the night before the show, held an earlier meeting with Pepe Navarro, who was skeptical at first but after more than two hours of questions, interest and attitude changed, giving rise to serious concerns about the facts presented.

Was located by a telephone call to Peter Duesberg, University of California for Pepe could talk to him asked Peter Duesberg directamente.Pepe if he could send a fax with your support, positioned on the scam SIDA.A the next morning, TV channel reported to Dr. Robert Willner was not necessary to repeat the "finger stick" to the cámara. Peter Duesberg and fax a copy of the Sunday Times on October 3, 1993 that Dr. Robert Willner had brought was sufficient and was exhibited at the televisión. Owner of the first page "Scourge of AIDS in Africa a" myth "and the two owners on pages 10 and 11," The plague that never was, "were seen by millions people in Spain. Phone calls from viewers were 4 to 1 in favor of the position on the AIDS scam.

In Madrid, was interviewed by Soon, more circulation weekly magazine in the period, with 4,000,000 readers in Spain. The three-page article entitled "Robert Willner: The HIV virus does not cause AIDS" was very favorable and honest. Contiene color photographs of the fingertip now "famous" and the owner of the Sunday Times. She made offers for publication of this book by companies in several countries. Conferences include Peter Duesberg and other dissidents. The story was published in "F", the fourth imoprtantes news agencies worldwide.

Dr. Robert Willner was conducted HIV tests on their return to the U.S. and the test was negative, said: "If necessary, put my finger with HIV-contaminated blood a thousand times, until this mortal scam perpetrators to stop.

Unfortunately shortly after Dr. Robert Willner publish this book was his medical license revoked for patients with AIDS and died April 15, 1995 of a heart attack, died of AIDS neck anunque probably definden theory that HIV oficilista would have liked.

https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/unconventional-thinkers-or-recklessly-dangerous-minds/411468.article?storycode=411468

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Bruce Charlton explains why he published a paper by 'perhaps the world's most hated scientist' and the importance of airing radical ideas

On 11 May, Elsevier, the multinational academic publisher, will sack me from my position as editor of Medical Hypotheses. This affair has attracted international coverage in major journals such as Nature, Science and the British Medical Journal.

How did it come to this? Last year I published two papers on Aids that led to a complaint sent to Elsevier.

This was not unexpected. Medical Hypotheses was established with the express intent of allowing ideas outside the mainstream to be aired so that they could be debated openly. Its policy had not changed since its founding more than three decades ago, and it remained unaltered under my editorship, which began in 2003.

Nevertheless, managers at Elsevier sided with those who made the complaints and against Medical Hypotheses. Glen P. Campbell, a senior vice-president at Elsevier, started a managerial process that immediately withdrew the two papers - without consulting me and without gaining editorial consent. After deliberating in private, the management at Elsevier informed me of plans to make Medical Hypotheses into an orthodox, peer-reviewed and censored journal. When I declined to implement the new policy, Elsevier gave notice to kick me out before my contract expired and without compensation.

One of the papers, by Marco Ruggiero's group at the University of Florence, (doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.06.002) teased the Italian health ministry that its policies made it seem as if the department did not believe that HIV was the cause of Aids. The other paper, by Peter Duesberg's group at University of California, Berkeley (doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.06.024), argued that HIV was not a sufficient cause of Aids.

The Ruggiero paper seems to have been an innocent bystander that was misunderstood both by those who made a complaint and by Elsevier. The real controversy focused on Duesberg's paper.

Why did I publish a paper by Duesberg - perhaps the world's most hated scientist?

Peter Duesberg is a brilliant and highly knowledgeable scientist with a track record of exceptional achievement that includes election to the US National Academy of Sciences. However, his unyielding opposition to the prevailing theory that HIV is a sufficient cause of Aids has made Duesberg an international hate figure, and his glittering career has been pretty much ruined.

I published Duesberg's paper because to do so was clearly in line with the long-term goals, practice and the explicitly stated scope and aims of Medical Hypotheses. We have published many, many such controversial and dissenting papers over the past 35 years. Duesberg is obviously a competent scientist, he is obviously the victim of an orchestrated campaign of intimidation and exclusion, and I interpret his sacrifice of status to principle as prima facie evidence of his sincerity. If I had rejected this paper for fear of the consequences, I would have been betraying the basic ethos of the journal.

Medical Hypotheses was founded 35 years ago by David Horrobin with the purpose of disseminating ideas, theories and hypotheses relating to biomedicine, and of doing so on the basis of editorial review instead of peer review. Horrobin argued that peer review intrinsically tended to exclude radical and revolutionary ideas, and that alternatives were needed. He chose me as his editorial successor because I shared these views.

Both Horrobin and I agreed that the only correct scientific way to deal with dissent was to publish it so that it could be debated, confirmed or refuted in an open and scientific forum. The alternative - suppressing scientific dissent by preventing publication using behind-the-scenes and anonymous procedures - we would both regard as extremely dangerous because it is wide open to serious abuse and manipulation by powerful interest groups.

Did I know that the Duesberg paper would be controversial?

Yes. I knew that Duesberg was being kept out of the mainstream scientific literature, and that breaching this conspiracy would annoy those who had succeeded in excluding him for so long.

When I published the Duesberg article, I envisaged it meeting one of two possible fates.

In the first scenario, the paper would be shunned or simply ignored - dropped down the memory hole. This is what has usually happened in the past when a famous scientist published ideas that their colleagues regarded as misguided or crazy. Linus Pauling (1901-94) was a Nobel prizewinner and one of the most important chemists in history. Yet his views on the medical benefits of vitamin C were regarded as wrong. He was allowed to publish them, but (rightly or wrongly) they were generally ignored in mainstream science.

In the other scenario, Duesberg's paper would attract robust criticism and (apparent) refutation. This happened with Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), a Fellow of the Royal Society whose work on the "steady state" theory of the Universe made him one of the most important cosmologists of the late 20th century. But his views on the origins of life on Earth and the Archaeopteryx fossil were generally regarded as eccentric. Hoyle's ideas were published, attracted much criticism, and were (probably) refuted.

So I expected that Duesberg's paper either would be ignored or would trigger letters and other papers countering the ideas and evidence presented. Medical Hypotheses would have published these counter-arguments, then provided space for Duesberg to respond to the criticisms and later allowed critics to reply to Duesberg's defence. That is, after all, how real science is supposed to work.

What I did not expect was that editors and scientists would be bypassed altogether, and that the matter would be settled by the senior managers of a multinational publishing corporation in consultation with pressure-group activists. Certainly, that would never have happened 25 years ago, when I began research in science.

The success of Medical Hypotheses

Nor did I not expect that I would be sacked, the journal destroyed and plans made to replace it with an impostor of the same name. I did not expect this because I had been doing a good job and Medical Hypotheses was a successful journal.

Elsevier managers in the UK had frequently commended my work, I got a good salary for my work as editor, and I was twice awarded substantial performance-related pay rises. The journal was expanded in size by 50 per cent under my editorship, and a spin-off journal, Bioscience Hypotheses (edited by William Bains), was launched in 2008 on the same principles of editorial review and a radical agenda.

The success of Medical Hypotheses is evidenced by its impact factor (average citations per paper), which under my editorship rose from about 0.6 to 1.4 - an above-average figure for biomedical journals. Download usage was also exceptionally high with considerably more than 1,000 online readers per day (or about half a million papers downloaded per year). This level of internet usage is equivalent to that of a leading title such as Journal of Theoretical Biology.

But Medical Hypotheses was also famous for publishing some rather "eccentric" papers, which were chosen for their tendency to provoke thought, trigger discussion or amuse in a potentially stimulating way. Papers such as Georg Steinhauser's recent analysis of belly-button fluff have polarised opinion and also helped make Medical Hypotheses a cult favourite among people such as Marc Abrahams, the founder of the IgNobel Prizes. But they have also made it the subject of loathing and ridicule among those who demand that science and the bizarre be kept strictly demarcated (to prevent "misunderstanding").

It is hard to measure exactly the influence of a journal, but some recent papers stand out as having had an impact. A report by Lola Cuddy and Jacalyn Duffin discussed the fascinating implications of an old lady with severe Alzheimer's disease who could still recognise tunes such as Oh, What a Beautiful Mornin'. This paper, which was discussed by Oliver Sacks in his book Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain, seems to have helped spark a renewed interest in music in relation to brain disease.

The paper "A tale of two cannabinoids" by E. Russo and G.W. Guy suggested that a combination of marijuana products tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) would be valuable painkillers. This idea has since been widely discussed in the scientific literature.

And in 2005, Eric Altschuler published in Medical Hypotheses a letter outlining his idea that survivors of the 1918 flu epidemic might even now retain immunity to the old virus. A few 1918 flu survivors were found who still had antibodies, and cells from those people were cloned to create an antiserum that protected experimental mice against the flu virus. The work was eventually published in Nature and received wide coverage in the US media.

What is my own position on the cause of Aids?

As an editor of a radical journal, my position was resolutely agnostic - in other words, I was not pursuing an agenda. I would publish papers presenting both sides of the debate. Most of the papers I published on Aids were orthodox ideas relating to HIV as the main cause. However, as well as Duesberg's article, I published some other papers challenging the HIV causal theory and proposing different mechanisms, such as work by Lawrence Broxmeyer arguing that some Aids patients actually have tuberculosis.

As for my personal opinions on the cause of Aids, these are irrelevant to real science because the subject is too far away from my core expertise and I do not work in that area. It is clear that Duesberg understands far more about HIV than I do, and more than at least 99 per cent of his critics do. Therefore, the opinions of most of Duesberg's critics, no matter how vehement, are just as irrelevant to real science as are mine.

But for me to collude with prohibiting Duesberg from publishing, I would have needed to be 100 per cent sure that Duesberg was 100 per cent wrong. Because even if he is mostly wrong, it is possible that someone of his ability may be seeing some kind of problem with the current consensus about Aids that other people of lesser ability (that is, most of us) are missing.

And if Duesberg may be even partially correct, it is extremely dangerous that the proper scientific process has been so ruthlessly distorted and subverted simply to exclude his ideas from the official scientific literature.

Bruce G. Charlton is professor of theoretical medicine, University of Buckingham.

http://reducetheburden.org/popper-heads-how-the-discoverer-of-aids-made-the-biggest-blunder-in-history/

March 3, 2014

POPPER-HEADS:
How the ‘Discoverer’ of ‘Aids’ Made the Biggest Blunder in History

by Cal Crilly

It is not hard to see where AIDS researchers totally stuffed up; it was right at the beginning. This is Gallo’s 1984 press conference where he declared HIV was the cause, this is so Hollywood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=k6zd3gdDKG8

Margaret Heckler & Robert Gallo – 1984 Press Conference

While this is Michael Gottlieb’s first ever key study on gays with AIDS in 1981. Gottlieb “noticed a pattern of unusual illnesses in homosexual men who’d had no contact with each other.” Not sexually transmitted was it? Instead Gottlieb claimed this was caused by a sexually transmitted mutant cytomegalovirus which depleted T-cells?

“The diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia was confirmed for all 5 patients ante-mortem by closed or open lung biopsy. The patients did not know each other and had no known common contacts or knowledge of sexual partners who had had similar illnesses. The 5 did not have comparable histories of sexually transmitted disease. Four had serologic evidence of past hepatitis B infection but had no evidence of current hepatitis B surface antigen.” “Two of the 5 reported having frequent homosexual contacts with various partners. All 5 reported using inhalant drugs, and 1 reported parenteral drug abuse. Three patients had profoundly depressed numbers of thymus-dependent lymphocyte cells and profoundly depressed in vitro proliferative responses to mitogens and antigens. Lymphocyte studies were not performed on the other 2 patients.”

[Pneumocystis Pneumonia—Los Angeles 1981
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470612/ ]

Michael Gottlieb either deliberately or stupidly completely ignored the fact that all the gay men had been nitrate inhalant users…

“All 5 reported using inhalant drugs, and 1 reported parenteral drug abuse.”

In writing up the case later for the New England Journal of Medicine Gottlieb claimed that “A high level of exposure of male homosexuals to cytomegalovirus-infected secretions may account for the occurrence of this immune deficiency.”

[Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and mucosal candidiasis in previously healthy homosexual men: evidence of a new acquired cellular immunodeficiency. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198112103052401 ]

This is the entire abstract, tell me if you can find any mention of poppers or nitrate inhalants after his first case study write up?

“Four previously healthy homosexual men contracted Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, extensive mucosal candidiasis, and multiple viral infections. In three of the patients these infections followed prolonged fevers of unknown origin. In all four cytomegalovirus was recovered from secretions. Kaposi’s sarcoma developed in one patient eight months after he presented with esophageal candidiasis. All patients were anergic and lymphopenic; they had no lymphocyte proliferative responses to soluble antigens, and their responses to phytohemagglutinin were markedly reduced. Monoclonal-antibody analysis of peripheral-blood T-cell subpopulations revealed virtual elimination of the Leu-3+ helper/inducer subset, an increased percentage of the Leu-2+ suppressor/cytotoxic subset, and an increased percentage of cells bearing the thymocyte-associated antigen T10. The inversion of the T helper to suppressor/cytotoxic ratio suggested that cytomegalovirus infection was an important factor in the pathogenesis of the immunodeficient state. A high level of exposure of male homosexuals to cytomegalovirus-infected secretions may account for the occurrence of this immune deficiency.

[N Engl J Med. 1981; 305:1425–31]

That got to the Journal by December of 1981. In 1993 though Gottlieb said that blaming cytomegalovirus for immune failure was a mistake.

“Lastly, I focused on a possible viral etiology. As a longtime student of human immune disorders, I knew that only a virus could wreak this type of damage on an adult immune system. Because cytomegalovirus (CMV) was cultured from multiple sites, I proposed that it might be causal. This proved to be an error. CMV had been reactivated because of the immune deficiency. However, I also suggested that a previously unrecognized toxin, microbe, or virus might be the culprit.”

[AIDS: The Discovery. http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1993/A1993LL19000001.pdf

The “unrecognized toxin” was completely forgotten. If you look at the start of that admission we can see clearly Gottlieb was and still is a guy who thinks he’s brilliant and he was always after the fame a virologist gets when they ‘discover’ a ‘new virus’. I call it negligence.

It’s actually worse than negligence because this led to the widespread use of a banned cancer drug called AZT. And this action had killed 300,000 men by 1993 when they decided at the Berlin AIDS Conference to lower the dose to ‘save lives’ and thus HAART was invented, less AZT, patients live longer, the numbers looked good. Then it was sold to the Africans. This has also led to appalling experiments on children, kidnappings and jail for women who even breastfed their children under the guise of ‘Child Protection’.

“In the fall of 1981 collected several cases of what I thought was a new syndrome. Thinking about publication, early in 1981, I phoned Arnold Relman, editor of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). I spoke with assistant editor Joe Elia and presented a sketch of the new syndrome to him. He quickly put Relman on the phone. I told them I had a story that would be as significant as Legionnaire’s disease.”

“Although I was an unknown assistant professor of medicine from UCLA, Relman was both kind and responsive. He listened to my description of the patients and the T helper cell deficiency we had observed. Since it would take a minimum of three months from the time I submitted an article until it was published, he suggested that I publish a brief article in the Center for Disease Control Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). NEJM would not view that as “prepublication” and would still consider accepting a more detailed article. He did not promise to publish my paper, but said he’d like to see it. My June 5, 1981, report in the MMWFT allowed me to alert public health officials and practicing physicians to the new disease and to stake a claim as the “discoverer” of AIDS.”

Well that report was so ‘brief’ no mention of popper use appeared in it at all, the media went into ‘viral panic’ mode and Gottlieb got his new ‘Syndrome’ in the journals so he was not merely an ‘unknown assistant professor of medicine from UCLA’. By also saying “However, I also suggested that a previously unrecognized toxin, microbe, or virus might be the culprit.” Gottlieb in effect was passing over the fact that nitrites had caused immune failure and passing on the ‘Virus that causes AIDS’ theory and backing up Gallo with his criminal HIV test. Gallo of course was a cancer virologist; today we now know that all cancers release retroviruses as our DNA is composed of 8% retroviruses. We also know now in the 21st Century that retroviruses are needed for a successful pregnancy as the placenta is the organ with the most retroviruses in the body while the reproductive germ cells in people are also chock full or retroviruses. Gallo didn’t know that in 1984. He also didn’t know there are retroviruses in women’s breasts as they are germ cells and in children’s brains as they grow. Robert Gallo also in 1984 had suggested using the p24 antigen test as a means of measuring ‘tumor size’ only 2 months before he made the claim that p24 was part of HIV at a press conference.

There was never any peer review of the HIV causes AIDS claim, that peer review was only first published in Nature in 2012 when Peter Duesberg was finally begrudgingly granted a peer review paper in a journal. There were cries of “How can we allow Duesberg rubbish to be printed when HIV has been ‘proven’ from all quarters.”

Following Gottieb’s claims in The New England Journal of Medicine there was a study in 1982 from Lancet that showed clearly that gay nitrite users with Kaposi’s and without Kaposi’s had low T-cell counts. This was 2 years before Gallo claimed a retrovirus he named HTLV-III or HIV was causing the T-cell depletion.

Gallo also had not isolated HIV and was trying to prove HIV existed with antibodies, given the fact we now know that our genome comprises 8% retroviruses why did Gallo blame a retrovirus when it was clear all the patients were snorting drugs which cause thymus atrophy, blood poisoning and even blindness?

“Both KS patients had regularly used amyl or butyl nitrite (AN); they had low helper/suppressor (H/S) T-lymphocyte ratios before chemotherapy”

[Amyl nitrite may alter T lymphocytes in homosexual men. 1982

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6121088]

“First, consider what may be the largest single money maker in the Gay world — the popper industry. Within the last fifteen years the use of poppers has exploded in the Gay male world, with a spillover lately among some Lesbians. Many Gay businesses, and not just bath houses, now routinely sell poppers, and their use has become as ubiquitous in bars, baths, and bookstores as their odor. A huge number of Gay men never have sex anymore without poppers. Many are unable even to masturbate without them. The money rolls in. A study in 1978 estimated that the popper industry was grossing $50 million a year. Today that figure is probably much higher.”

[POPPERS: an ugly side of gay business. Nov. 1981

http://paganpressbooks.com/jpl/EVANSPOP.HTM]

“In the Gay ghettos of the Seventies and early Eighties, poppers were always at the center of the action. On any given night at, say, the Anvil in Manhattan, a large percentage of the men on the dance floor would have poppers in hand, and many of the rest would be helping to pass the bottles around. Some disco clubs would even add to the general euphoria by occasionally spraying the dance floor with poppers fumes.

Michael Rumaker, in his classic book A Day and a Night at the Baths, describes the tubs as “permeated with that particularly inert, greasy odor of poppers. Wherever you went, the musky chemical smell of it was constantly in your nostrils.” He found himself heading to the single, small window, in order to gasp a few breaths of “something other than the cold, kerosene smell of amyl.”

My own most vivid memory of poppers in action goes back to Fire Island, sometime in the Seventies – that legendary time. Yes, children, I was there, I remember it. I was visiting friends in the Pines, and was spending a couple of hours at the disco one night. Across the room, I noticed an acquaintance of mine, the writer George Whitmore, dancing up a storm and inhaling liberally from a poppers bottle which he kept in the pocket of his jeans. Somehow in the course of the evening, the bottle broke, and the contents spilled all over George’s leg, giving him a terrible and very unsightly burn. It made me wonder what kind of damage inhaling the stuff must do.”

[THE POPPERS STORY: The Rise and Fall and Rise of ‘The Gay Drug’

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/iypoppers.htm]

So poppers were causing blood poisoning in the Journals back in the 70’s.

[Methemoglobinemia from Sniffing Butyl Nitrite 1979

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=693338]

“Discusses the abuse and effects of inhalation of nitrites. Use of amyl nitrite by the gay population during homosexual activity; Clinical aspects of alkyl nitrite exposure; Efforts of government agencies to control the use of such compounds and minimize their hazards to users.

[Blush Not with Nitrates 1980

http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/6986503/blush-not-nitrates]

And poppers are still causing blood poisoning, heart attacks and blindness to this day.

“Both the popularity of and legal tolerance for poppers have led to the perception that these drugs are relatively innocuous. Here, we describe four patients who were seen within a few months of one another and who had prolonged visual loss as a result of damage to photoreceptors shortly after inhaling poppers. In January 2010, Patient 1, a 27-year-old woman, presented with an 11-day history of a reduction in bilateral vision and a “central bright dot” in both eyes. The night before the onset of symptoms, she had attended a party, at which both she and Patient 2 had inhaled poppers (brand name, Jungle Juice) and consumed approximately half a bottle of high-grade alcohol.”

[Poppers-Associated Retinal Toxicity 2010

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1005118

Pop goes the O2: a case of popper-induced methaemoglobinamia 2012

http://casereports.bmj.com/content/2012/bcr-2012-007176.full]

The reality is that a lot of gay guys were having a disco to end all disco’s while the Reagan Christians surround them in a few ghettos and put the voodoo on them even more. The other logical ‘this poison could cause AIDS’ claim is that during the early 1980’s Hot Oil sexual lubricants were sold with Benzenes to gays in particular with levels that would cause immune failure and cancers. Stephen Byrnes writing in 1997 provided an example of the Spanish oil incident where people just withered away and wasted from benzene poisoning. “In short, the victims of TOS became ill from ingesting benzene-contaminated olive oil. The symptoms of this condition were virtually identical to American pellagra: immunosuppression, fever, chills, sweats, rashes, eosinophilia, muscle wasting, cough, dyspnea, muscle cramps, dry eyes and mouth, skin lesions, dementia, peripheral neuropathy, pneumonia, chronic hepatitis, lymph swelling, and opportunistic infections. Additionally, cellular and immunological abnormalities occurred: an inversion of CD4/CD8 cell ratios, production of autoantibodies to collagen DNA, and reduced T and B cellular responses to mitogens. It was proposed that the autoantibody production was the result of an increase in the CD4/CD8 T cell ratios.

While it is true that the first cases of AIDS, called GRID back then, were reported to the CDC in 1981 by Dr. Michael Gottlieb, the first cases of KS and AIDS were seen in the gay community beginning in 1978 and the mysterious new disease seemed to only strike two groups of people: bottoms (passive in anal intercourse), and “fistees” (those who liked to be fisted, or have someone’s fist and arm anally inserted into them). Exclusive tops were not affected, unless they were heavy drug users. Those with a preference for oral sex, giving or receiving, may have gotten other venereal ailments, but they did not catch the new disease. What was it that bottoms and fistees had in common, besides poppers to relax the smooth muscles of the anus? Lubricant and lots of it if they were promiscuous. Were new lubricants introduced to the gay community in 1978? Previously, gay men had used KY jelly, Crisco, or baby oil for anal sex but in 1978 there were new lubricants introduced and heavily marketed to the gay community, viz., Lube and Performance, as advertisements in back issues of gay periodicals show. As a matter of fact, 1978 marked the dawn of “special” lubricants, both “hot” and regular, formulated for and used by gay men. They were all oil-based and contained very high amounts of acetone and benzoic acid in them. The oils were, like the bad olive oil in Madrid, “denatured.” Curiously, as these lubricants became available to gay men in other countries, via mail order, AIDS began to appear in those places.

[Benzene, Lubricants and AIDS Explore! January 1997

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/benzeneandaids18jan02.shtml; http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/sblubejob.htm ]

And to this day FDA regulation of lubricants is questionable, I know one at my supermarket contains anti-freeze to get the ‘hot’ feel... “Although most people will list only K-Y Jelly when asked to recall the names of personal lubricants, hundreds of the products are being used for sex across the globe. These sex aids are designed to make things easier. So it’s a little unsettling that experiments carried out in recent years have indicated that some of the products might be smoothing the way for disease transmission. Used to reduce friction and increase pleasure during intercourse, lubricants are about a $219 million market in the U.S. alone, according to the Chicago-based market research firm SymphonyIRI Group. But a handful of studies have called into question the safety of these sex aids, although none have shown cut-and-dried proof of risk. Some of the experiments have shown that personal lubricants can damage cells lining both the vagina and rectum, potentially making the body more vulnerable to sexually transmitted infections (STIs). And one epidemiological investigation, published early this year, reported that participants who consistently used personal lubricants for rectal intercourse had a higher prevalence of STIs, such as chlamydia, than inconsistent users

[Sex. Transm. Dis., DOI: 10.1097/olq.0b013e318235502b; Studies Raise Questions About Safety Of Personal Lubricants 2012 https://cen.acs.org/articles/90/i50/Studies-Raise-Questions-Safety-Personal.html ]

“Ingredients to avoid: Though this list isn’t by any means complete, some questionable ingredients include: parabens, petrochemicals, benzene derivatives such as sodium benzoate, methyl, ethyl and propylparaben, and benzoate of soda. Boric acid, salicylates and cinnamic aldehyde (an ingredient used in ‘hot’ lubricants) are also questionable.

[11 Nasty Side Effects of Using the Wrong Lubrication
http://www.examiner.com/article/11-nasty-side-effects-of-using-the-wrong-lubrication ]

I could tell you my personal Benzene stories but won’t bore you with the carnage. Then there are still shocking amounts of hydroquinone being used by black women without anyone telling them?

“Attention is drawn to the widespread use of bleaching preparations by Black women. These products often contain hydroquinone. They act efficiently as bleaching agents, but chronic oversaturation of the skin with hydroquinone eventually produces ochronosis. This complication has reached epidemic proportions in the Transvaal. Although the assay of hydroquinone in cosmetic products has not yet been standardized, we present some provisional results. The clinical, social and industrial aspects are also significant.”

[Chronic hydroquinone poisoning of the skin from skin-lightening cosmetics. A South African epidemic of ochronosis of the face in dark-skinned individuals. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/7361208/reload=0;jsessionid=g0HmzrwpcN7b3mMue2U5.10 ]

Hydroquinone is still on sale. “Usually associated with use in skin lighteners, especially those products marketed to women of color, hydroquinone may also be a contaminant in other cosmetics ingredients. Linked to cancer and organ-system toxicity, it is one of the most toxic ingredients used in personal care products.”

[Hydroquinone http://safecosmetics.org/article.php?id=289 ]

People will say “But what about Africa? Aren’t they all dying from HIV?” Well housing and food is desperate, I feel lucky. In Australia of course there is no AIDS we are walking steaks from the night before, the burger at lunch, the bacon and eggs for breakfast, Chiko roll and Breaker at tea, no worries here.

It’s hardly appropriate to be saving up to give these people drugs like AZT and Nevirapine when they are starving and the more money spent on these toxic drugs the less there will be for any real hospital services.

Food Bank SA spokesman Keri Uys said yesterday: “South Africa is in dire straights. The entire country is affected. It is not just rural areas. Every day millions of people go to be bed hungry. There are children whose daily food is half a white-bread sandwich. How can you bring up a nation on this?” “The implication is a death sentence.”

[Twelve million going to bed hungry in SA

http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2013/01/30/twelve-million-going-to-bed-hungry-in-sa]

South Africa is basically a mining dump with lots of pesticides from farming thrown everywhere too. “Feeding schemes based on school garden produce have been proposed as an effective solution to food insecurity and hunger among learners in South Africa. However, few studies have looked at the potential contamination of school food gardens when situated near mine tailing dams.”

“Results. High levels of arsenic were found in the school soil samples, and elevated concentrations of lead and mercury in the school vegetables. Calculation of the estimated daily intake for a child of 30 kg, however, indicated that levels of lead, mercury and arsenic in vegetables were within acceptable limits. However, the levels of lead in the vegetable samples were high across all three sites.

Conclusion. Further investigation and research should be undertaken to assess the source/s and extent of public exposure to heavy metals in vegetables in South Africa.”

[Heavy metal contamination in a school vegetable garden in Johannesburg 2012 http://www.samj.org.za/index.php/samj/article/view/5184/4008 ]

The miners who worked for years without gasmasks have silicosis and they get TB from the mines and going back home to the slums.

“Older in-service gold miners in South Africa have a high prevalence of PTB, which is significantly associated with dust and silica exposure, even in the absence of silicosis. Limitations include a survivor workforce and the use of cumulative exposures based on current exposures. Dust control is an important component in control of the PTB epidemic in South African gold mines.”

[Tuberculosis and silica exposure in South African gold miners

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2078150/ ]

The people in Durban are downwind from the Engen refinery. South African Environmental Justice struggles against “toxic” petrochemical industries in South Durban:

[The Engen Refinery Case http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/brian.html]

While the people in Johannesburg are sitting on a rising arsenic water supply, no one seems to be watching.

“Millions of litres of highly acidic mine water is rising up under Johannesburg and, if left unchecked, could spill out into its streets some 18 months from now, Parliament’s water affairs portfolio committee heard on Wednesday. The acid water is currently about 600m below the city’s surface, but is rising at a rate of between 0.6 and 0,9m a day, water affairs deputy director water quality management Marius Keet told MPs. “[It] can have catastrophic consequences for the Johannesburg central business district if not stopped in time. A new pumping station and upgrades to the high-density sludge treatment works are urgently required to stop disaster,” he warned.”

[Johannesburg on acidic water time bomb 2010

http://mg.co.za/article/2010-07-21-johannesburg-on-acidic-water-time-bomb]

I’m sure there are more problems like no jobs, no unemployment benefit, depression, crime, drug use, smoking, drinking, stress, I don’t live there but will statistics like these you don’t need HIV to do the job.

“It found that, in Johannesburg, 43% of the poor faced starvation and malnutrition. Researchers believe the figure could be higher.”

Anyway the end result of Gottlieb’s 1981 failure to mention NITRATES as a cause of AIDS was every virologist in town and media outlet went orgasmic over Gottlieb’s ‘New Virus’ and by the time Robert Gallo held his press conference about HIV causing AIDS in 1984 everyone was hypnotized by their voodoo magic which continues to caste it’s spell to this day….

“The first recognized cases of AIDS were reported in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) on June 5, 1981. I recall this report vividly. A few months earlier, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had begun sending an advance copy of the MMWR text to state health departments. The advance text of the June 5 MMWR had a lead article on the sudden and unexplained finding of five apparently unrelated cases of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in five young gay men from Los Angeles. The MMWR text was received in my office just before our weekly Tuesday afternoon staff meeting was to start. I handed the text to Tom Ault, who was responsible for the state’s venereal disease field unit and asked him to have some of our federal- or state-assigned staff in Los Angeles assist in the investigation of these cases. I remember saying to him that it may not turn out to be much of anything, but it may be the start of something. I never imagined that that something would eventually develop into a worldwide epidemic of disease and death. In the ensuing weeks and months, it became apparent that the mysterious illness reported from Los Angeles was also present among gay men in San Francisco.”

[The AIDS Epidemic in San Francisco: The Medical Response, 1981-1984, Volume IV http://content.cdlib.org/view?docId=kt729005cr&&doc.view=entire_text]

The dead might have something else to say about it??

“Those who have eyes to see are witnessing genocide-the genocide of gay men. Millions of dollars are now being spent on an international advertising campaign, “Living With HIV”, in which gay men and other members of “risk groups” are being told: “Get tested for antibodies to HIV [the alleged “AIDS virus”] — if you “test positive” you need “medical intervention” which could “put time on your side”. The “medical intervention” is AZT (also known as Retrovir and zidovudine), and the campaign is paid for, directly and indirectly, by Burroughs-Wellcome, the manufacturer of AZT. The campaign consists of a phoney diagnosis followed by a lethal treatment. Already tens of thousands of objectively healthy gay men have been scared and bullied and bamboozled into taking AZT, allegedly in order to “slow the progression to AIDS”. Optimism regarding their prognosis would be foolish. Except for the lucky few who stop “treatment” in time, they will die. Death is the expected biochemical consequence of taking AZT, for the fundamental action of the drug is to terminate DNA synthesis, the very life process itself. As Joseph Sonnabend has stated, “AZT is incompatible with life”. Without a single benefit demonstrated by honest and competent research, AZT can do nothing but kill.”

[HIV Voodoo from Burroughs-Wellcome by John Lauritsen; New York Native 7 Jan. 1991 /revised 16 Jan. 1991 http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/jlvoodoo.htm ]

Thank you John Lauritsen for blowing the whistle so hard I found the book The AIDS War in the University of Queensland library in 1998 and “got curious??” At least I know I’m not mad.

2015 Oct 23 http://www.ghanacelebrities.com/2014/10/05/real-origin-hivaids-usa-infected-africa-rest-world-hivaids/

The REAL Origin of HIV/AIDS: USA Infected Africa and the Rest of the World with HIV/AIDS?

GC Staff Posted on 05 Oct 2014 at 7:43pm

Acquired Immunodeficiency Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) at one point in time, became a death sentence for most infected people living in less developed countries in the world (Kapstein and Busby, 2013). The unannounced and unpredicted rapid emergence and spread of this slow acting viral infection baffled many including well known scientific bodies such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). This essay is going to research into and propose the probable origin of this disease as in relation to historical incidents, coupled with both popular and unpopular scientific theories about it.

AIDS is believed to be caused by the effect of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Furthermore, AIDS is terminology used to describe a range of diseases and infections which are present in people with a weakened immune system caused by HIV. In other words, AIDS is the late stage manifestation of HIV (Kenny et al, 2012).

HIV is a retrovirus, as such, it uses its single stranded ribose nucleic acid (RNA) to make copies of deoxyribose nucleic acid (DNA) inside a host cell; in this case a lymphocyte called T lymphocyte helper cell with CD4 receptors on its surface membrane (Whiteet al, 2011). When the HIV enters the cytoplasm of a T helper cell with CD4 receptor, also known as CD4 T lymphocyte cell, it employs an enzyme called reverse transcriptase which produces DNA from the virus RNA. This is the reverse of the transcription process whereby DNA is used to produce a strand of RNA for protein synthesis. The newly produced DNA strand is then replicated to form two strands of DNA held together by a weak bond.

The DNA strands move into the nucleus and then integrated into the genetic material (genome) the host CD4 T lymphocyte cell using a retroviral integrase enzyme (Krebs et al, 2014). The HIV genetic material becomes part of the chromosome of the CD4 T lymphocyte cell and either stays dormant or virus RNA will be produced from the virus DNA to make proteins necessary for new viruses. When the new viruses are formed, they burst out of the CD4 T lymphocyte cells to infect other CD4 Tlymphocyte cells, repeating the same process over again (Alberts et al., 2013).

The HIV causes the destruction of CD4 T cells via cellular mechanism such as apoptosis of surrounding cells, killing of infected CD4 T lymphocyte cells when newly formed viruses burst out of the cell and the killing of infected CD4 T lymphocyte cells by cytotoxic lymphocyteswith a chemical called perforin (Garg, Mohl and Joshi, 2012; Kumar et al., 2012). HIV easily compromises the immune system of humans because it targets the lymphocytes which are necessary in the defence against pathogens; it attacks the cells which are supposed to protect the human body from disease causing foreign cells (Sompayrac, 2012).

According to the classification system introduced by the Centers for Disease Control and prevention (CDC) of the United States, there are various stages in HIV infection symptom manifestation (Curran and Jaffe, 2011).

Stage I, also known as the acute seroconversion illness, begins between one and six weeks after the patient is infected with the virus. Typical symptoms of this stage include fever, enlarged lymph nodes (lymphadenopathy), persistent headaches, and diarrhoea. At this stage, the HIV infection treatment with antiretroviral therapy (ART) has a higher rate of success than any stage therefore highlighting the importance of early diagnosis (Weeks and Alcamo, 2010).

At this stage, the number of virus in the body system fluctuates due to an increased in the transcription of virus RNA and subsequent production of the virus in the CD4 T lymphocyte cells of the immune system. The capacity to transmit the virus is extremely high at this stage due to the elevated levels of the virus in the body. The immune system gradually lowers the number of the virus in the body to a normalised level due to the increase in the production of more CD4 T lymphocyte cells (CDC, 2014).

Stage II also known as the asymptomatic stage, at this stage, even though HIV is still and reproducing at a slow rate, no symptoms are exhibited by the host. The host body will not manifest any infection for periods which could last for more than a decade for some patients but shorter for others. Towards the end of this stage, the level of HIV in the host begins to rise as the level of CD4 T lymphocyte cells begin to fall.

As this commences, the patient will begin to manifest HIV related infections as the immune system becomes compromised. Persistent generalised lymphodenophthy (PGL) begins to manifest for three or more months. Even though virus level may seem to be low, the ability to transmit the infection remains potent however lower in patients receiving ART. This is the early stages of the last stage of the HIV infection; AIDS (Greenwood et al., 2012).

The last stage (AIDS) is characterised by a severely damaged immune system which leads to its inability to offer any method of defence to infections and infection related tumours called opportunistic infections. There are two determinant factors in AIDS. The first one is when the CD4 Tlymphocyte cells level falls below 200 cells per microliter of blood. The average level of CD4 T lymphocyte cells is around 500 to 1600 per microliter.

The other determinant factor is a patient developing one of more opportunistic infection, which has no relation to the level of CD4 T lymphocyte cellsin the blood of the host. Opportunistic infections include pnuemocystiscarinii which causes fever, pain in the chest, tiredness and fatigue, bacterial infections such as tuberculosis, which is more prevalent in developing countries with traces of the disease within the population, mycobacterium avium complex is more prevalent in HIV patients in industrialised countries characterised by night sweating, diarrhoea, pains in the abdomen and weight loss. Kaposi’s sarcoma, a tumour which affects the lungs and digestive track causes the shortness of breath, coughing of blood, pains in the abdomen or bleeding (Shields and Shields, 2008).

Modes of transmission of HIV involve the exchange of bodily fluids between an infected person and a healthy person. In an infected patient, HIV count is highest in the blood, semen and vaginal fluid (Ramaiah, 2008). HIV is transmitted through either horizontally or vertically. Horizontal transmission includes infections acquired via s*x (between men and women, also known as heteros*xual s*x, s*x between men), use of contaminated needles for intravenous drug usage and transfusion or exchange of contaminated blood products. Vertical transmission is the transmission of the virus from mother to child (Wellensiek, 2007).

Transmission of HIV is most common with s*xual contact with an infected person. Globally, a major method of transmitting is via s*x between men and women. Nonetheless, this is significantly different among countries with different economic status. In the United States, men who engage in homos*xual contact account for about 64% of newly infected people (CDC, 2014b). Whereas, in the United Kingdom heteros*xual unprotected s*xual intercourse transmission has overlapped homos*xual intercoursetransmission (Thomas and Willacy, 2011). More so, studies reveal a negative correlation between the economic status of a country and the level of transmission risk through unprotected s*x. The risk of transmission is about four to ten times more in developing countries than in developed countries (Boily et al., 2009).

Blood and blood products represent the second most common mode of transmission for HIV (Rom and Markowitz, 2007). This mode can occur via transfusion of infected blood, intravenous drug usage with shared needle and contaminated needle injury. The transmission rate for HIV with infected blood is about 93%. The risk of getting infected with HIV in developed countries is very low, however, in developing countries blood transfusion with infected blood represents about 15% of HIV infections (Rom and Markowitz, 2007). In the United States, needle sharing by drug users represent over 10% of newly infected patients in 2009 alone. Furthermore in some areas over 80% of intravenous drug users are infected with HIV (Rom and Markowitz, 2007).

Mother to child transmission occurs during foetus development, child birth, or during breastfeeding. The risk of HIV transmission through mother-to-child is about 20% at child birth and 35% during breastfeeding of babies (Coutsoudis, Kwaan and Thomson, 2010). Furthermore, mother-to-child transmission represents about 90% of HIV infection in children (Coutsoudis, Kwaan and Thomson, 2010).

Currently there is no cure or vaccine for HIV; however, there are two methods of treatment for people infected with HIV; antiviral therapy and medication for opportunistic infections.

Antiviral therapy involves the use of antiretroviral medications to retard the reproduction of HIV in the body. There are six classes of antiretroviral drugs; non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, protease inhibitors, fusion inhibitors, CCR5 antagonists and integrase inhibitors. These drugs work in different ways such as nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors prevent the virus RNA from being reverse transcribed by the DNA polymerase in the nucleus of the CD4 lymphocyte cells (Ka’opua and Linsk, 2007). The medications are administered in combinations to increase its efficacy (WHO, 2014). In order to reduce the risk of death, the World Health Organisation recommends the commencing of antiretroviral drug treatment when the CD4 T lymphocyte cell count falls below 350 per microlitre of when people exhibit symptoms of the disease.

The prevention of opportunistic infections helps greatly in the management of the disease. The administration of antiretroviral medication proves effective at reducing the chances of developing opportunistic infection since virus reproduction is slowed down therefore the CD4 T lymphocyte cells count rises to maintain the functionality of the immune system (Montessori et al., 2004). A combination of antibiotic medications such as pneumocystic pneumonia (PCP) and vaccination for hepatitis A and B are also administered to people with high risk of developing HIV or those who are newly diagnosed (Laurence, 2006). Prophylaxis medications combined with antiretroviral drugs and cessation of breastfeeding successfully reduces the risk of vertical transmission of the infection to a baby. However, some antiretroviral medications cause birth defects therefore are not given to HIV infected women who want to give birth or are already pregnant.

Preventive measures employed to stop the spread of HIV infection includes the promotion of the awareness of the disease, safer s*x lifestyle, use of new needles by drug users, and the use of pre-exposure and post-exposure prophylaxis.

Safe s*x practices such as the consistent use of condoms with multiple s*x partners and the reduction of promiscuity. Regular usage of condoms over a long period reduces the chances of transmission by about 80%, the rate of transmission between an infected person and the partner is about 1% per year if condoms are used regularly according to the WHO (Crosby and Bounse, 2012). The use of reverse transcriptase inhibitor as soon after s*xual intercourse by women has been shown to provide some success at preventing transmission. However, evidence proves that the use of abstinence as a preventive measure has been unsuccessful at reducing the spread of the disease (Underhill, Operario and Montgomery, 2007).

Transmission caused by needle-sharing by intravenous drug users has been reduces drastically by programmes such as need-exchange schemes.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis such as antiretroviral administration of tenofovir to infected people with CD4 T lymphocyte cell counts below 340 per microlitre provides 96% protection for their partners from getting infected (Anglemyer et al., 2011).

Post-exposure prophylaxis like zidovudine with tenofovir or other antiretroviral medications has been documented to decrease the risk of getting infected through needle injury by about five folds (Kuhar et al., 2013).

HIV is a chronic disease, therefore without the onset of the AIDS, the prognosis of patients is between nine to eleven years without treatment (UNAIDS and WHO, 2007). After the onset of AIDS, the person can survive up to 19 months without any treatment (Vogel et al., 2010). Antiretroviral medication and medications against opportunistic infections early administration increas

Date: 2016-01-03; view: 583