Re: "Hysteria, Thy Name is SARS"

From: Samantha (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Tue May 13 2003 - 23:57:17 MDT

  • Next message: Samantha: "Re: "Hysteria, Thy Name is SARS""

    On Tuesday 13 May 2003 12:42 pm, Pat Fallon wrote:
    > > > The same Micahel Fumento who touted
    > > >the "myth of heterosexual AIDS"?
    > > > This man is a joke and I consider him
    > >>
    > >>personally culpable for millions of needless deaths.
    > >
    > > What on Earth are you talking about?
    > > The man said 13 years ago that all the
    > > talk about AIDS breaking out in the
    > > heterosexual community was nonsense and
    > > he explained exactly why with facts and figures.
    > > Time has proven him absolutely correct.
    > > How can being right cause the death of millions?
    > >
    > > John K Clark jonkc@att.net
    >
    > I agree with John.
    >

    Your thesis has a few problems.

    1) Why have none of the myriad groups that are studying and
    attempting to cure AIDS agreeing with your argument?

    2) How do you suppose non-drug using, non-hemophiliac, heterosexual
    men and women manage to pass this disease to one another. It is an
    established fact that they do so. Do they somehow infect each other
    with stress which gives results that somehow look like a deadly case
    of AIDS? Somehow I think not.

    3) Why are HIV positive test results also just as correlated with
    development of AIDS in non-risk groups?

    4) I would advise strongly against having unprotected sex on the wild
    theory that AIDS is not infectious! I know people who today have
    AIDS (replete with full symptoms, not just testing positive) who
    believed such arguments. I beg of everyone here not to believe the
    argument to the extent of acting fully consistently with it.

    - samantha

    > Fumento's predictions on AIDS epidemiology in America and western
    > Europe have proven to be much more accurate than the past
    > predicitons of our gov health authorities.
    >
    > I would go further and argue that AIDS science is fundamentally
    > flawed.
    >
    > In the 1960's a central dogma of molecular genetics was that DNA
    > behaves in a static way; DNA makes RNA; RNA cannot be transcribed
    > back into DNA; RNA comes into existence only on the basis of DNA.
    > In 1970, when they detected biochemically that there is a reverse
    > flow of genetic material, they didn't give up the dogma or even try
    > to change it. Instead, they called it an exception to a central
    > dogma of molecular genetics, and explained it by postulating the
    > existence of retroviruses. It was believed that the presence of
    > Reverse Transcriptise activity was unambiguous evidence of the
    > presence of a novel virus, a retrovirus.
    >
    > When Montagnier and Gallo first tried to isolate a virus from the
    > blood of sick patients they saw RT activity and took that as strong
    > evidence of the presence of a retrovirus. However, reverse
    > transcription activity is not unique to retroviruses, and in fact
    > it is now appreciated that RT activity in normal cells is promoted
    > by the very conditions which Montagnier and Gallo subjected their
    > patients' T-cells to. Therefore, detection of RT activity in these
    > cultures was not proof that there was a retrovirus present.
    >
    > In 1997 the leading science journal Virology published two papers
    > that provided stunning new data on the "isolation" of HIV.(1)(2)
    > For the first time, electron microscope images of "HIV" banded at
    > the density required for retroviruses were published. They revealed
    > "major contaminants" in "pure HIV", consisting of an excess of
    > vesicles - particles of cellular proteins.(3)
    >
    > When Montagnier was asked in July 1997 by French Journalist Djamel
    > Tahi why such photos were not previously published, his answer was
    > because, even after "Roman effort", they could see no particles
    > with "morphology typical of retroviruses. I repeat we did not
    > purify..."(4)
    >
    > The samples Montagnier and Gallo called "viral isolates" contain a
    > few objects that resemble retroviruses (the "HIV") plus lots of
    > other things, which clearly aren't viruses. Without a pure isolate
    > of virus-like particles, there is no way to extract proteins and
    > genetic material out of a molecular soup and know that they came
    > from one group of particular looking objects rather than another.
    >
    > As the Perth Group [http://www.theperthgroup.com/menu.htm] argues,
    > "Unlike other viruses [HIV] has never been isolated as an
    > independent stable particle."(5) Considering the 1997 Virology
    > release of the photos showing no viral isolation, and Montagnier's
    > admission that ".we did not purify"; it is hard to deny the logic
    > of their arguments.
    >
    > The inability to isolate the virus means no proteins which are
    > viral and free from contaminants have ever been obtained, thus no
    > one can be certain what the antibodies are that bind to the
    > proteins. This is the heart of the problem facing all HIV tests.
    > The manufacturer of the most popular HIV test kit openly
    > acknowledges, "there is no recognized standard for establishing the
    > presence or absence of antibodies to HIV in human blood."(6)
    >
    > So if a positive "HIV" test does not detect antibodies to a virus,
    > why then is it correlated with a higher incidence of developing
    > AIDS diseases, at least in high-risk groups?
    >
    > Eleopulos et al [the Perth Group] had noticed a link between the
    > AIDS risk groups in the US and Europe. Gay men, drug users and
    > haemophiliacs are exposed to foreign semen, nitrites, illicit drugs
    > and factor VIII (the blood clotting protein that haemophiliacs must
    > inject). These substances are potent cellular oxidants.(7) When
    > oxidation is prolonged or excessive, cells become abnormal, injured
    > and susceptible to diseases. In Eleopulos' view, oxidative stress
    > produces biochemical signals that have been misinterpreted as
    > evidence of a new virus. The immune system produces antibodies in
    > response to stress, but these antibodies are to products of the
    > disordered cells, not to an invading virus.
    >
    > Normal human DNA contains retroviral information which did not get
    > there following a retroviral infection. The cell was born with
    > it.(8) So amongst all our DNA there are stretches made up of some
    > retroviral information and that may sit there maybe all your life
    > until something happens. The DNA starts to make RNA and hence
    > proteins, and this may go even further and lead to the assembly of
    > endogenous retroviral particles. They're called endogenous because
    > they're not something that got in from the outside. Like HIV is
    > supposed to. Something that gets in from the outside is called
    > exogenous. Long before the AIDS era everyone knew that in animal
    > cells endogenous retrovirus production could occur spontaneously.
    > You make a cell culture and do nothing else. Just leave it on the
    > bench for a few days or maybe a few weeks and then one day it
    > starts to produce retroviral-like particles. They seemingly come
    > out of nowhere and the process can be significantly accelerated and
    > the yield of particles increased, sometimes millions of times, by
    > conditions which induce cellular activation, the same conditions
    > which are obligatory to obtain what is called HIV from cell
    > cultures.
    >
    >
    > Also, false positives may be caused by vaccinations against other
    > diseases or current or past diseases.(9)
    >
    > The Perth Groups non-infectious AIDS model would explain why
    > Fumento's predictions were more accurate than those by mainstream
    > health authorities.
    >
    > It would also predict that we all can produce proteins and
    > antibodies that would trigger a positive "AIDS" result if we were
    > subject to certain stressful conditions [see note 9 for references
    > to 64 conditions that can cause false-positive HIV test results].
    >
    > Dr. Robert Giraldo has worked from 1993 to present as a
    > technologist in the Laboratories of Clinical Immunology and
    > Molecular diagnosis at the New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill
    > Cornell Medical Center, in New York City. He had the opportunity to
    > run and know in detail the Elisa, Western blot and PCR (viral load)
    > tests for HIV. The ELISA test is a test for antibodies against what
    > is supposed to be the Human Immunodeficiency Virus or HIV. To run
    > this test, an individual's serum has to be diluted to a ratio of
    > 1:400 with a special specimen diluent.
    >
    > This extraordinarily high dilution of the person's serum [400
    > times] took him by surprise. Most serologic tests that look for the
    > presence of antibodies against germs uses neat serum [undiluted].
    > For example, the tests that look for antibodies to hepatitis A and
    > B viruses, rubella virus, syphilis, hystoplasma and cryptococus, to
    > mention a few of them, use undiluted serum. However, to try to
    > prevent false positive reactions some serologic tests use diluted
    > serum; for example this is the case with tests that look for
    > antibodies to measles, varicella and mumps viruses which use a
    > dilution of 1:16, to cytomegalovirus [CMV] 1:20 and to Epstein-Barr
    > Virus [EBV] 1:10.
    >
    > The obvious questions are: What makes HIV so unique that the test
    > serum needs to be diluted 400 times? And what would happen if the
    > individual's serum is not diluted ?
    >
    > Quoting Dr. Giraldo (10):
    >
    > To answer these questions I ran an experiment in a medical
    > laboratory in Yorktown Heights, New York. I ran it using the same
    > test kit reagents that are usually used to run the ELISA test in
    > most clinical laboratories worldwide.
    >
    >
    > I first took samples of blood that, at 1:400 dilution, tested
    > negative for antibodies to HIV. I then ran the exact same serum
    > samples through the test again, but this time without diluting
    > them. Tested straight, they all came positive.
    >
    >
    > Since that time I have run about 100 specimens and have always
    > gotten the same result. I even ran my own blood which at 1:400
    > reacts negative. At 1:1 [undiluted] it reacted positive.
    >
    > The following are three possible explanations for why undiluted
    > specimens of blood always react positive at the ELISA test:
    >
    >
    > 1. Everybody has HIV antibodies...
    >
    > 2. Everybody has different levels of HIV infection...
    >
    > 3. The test is not specific for HIV...
    >
    > The only proper way for establishing the sensitivity and
    > specificity of a given test is with a gold standard. However, since
    > HIV has never been isolated as an independent purified viral entity
    > (11-13), there cannot be a gold standard for HIV.
    >
    > Since there is no scientific evidence that the ELISA test is
    > specific for HIV antibodies, a reactive ELISA test at any
    > concentration of the serum would mean presence of non-specific or
    > polyspecific antibodies (14). These antibodies could be present in
    > all blood samples. They are most likely a result of the stress
    > response, having no relation to any retrovirus, let alone HIV
    > (15,16). In this case, a reactive test could be a measure of the
    > degree of one's exposure to stressor or oxidizing agents (17,18).
    >
    > [end Giraldo quote]
    >
    > To choose between competing theories, it is often productive to
    > compare predictions. In this regard, I think the non-infectious
    > AIDS theory of the Perth Group has fared better than the mainstream
    > infectious AIDS theory. Your mileage may vary.
    >
    > Pat Fallon
    >
    > pfallon@ptd.net
    >
    >
    > Notes:
    >
    > (1) Bess JW, Gorelick RJ, Bosche WJ, Henderson LE, Arthur LO.
    > (1997). Microvesicles are a source of contaminating cellular
    > proteins found in purified HIV-1 preparations. Virol. 230:134-144.
    > (2) Gluschankof P, Mondor I, Gelderblom HR, Sattentau QJ. (1997).
    > Cell membrane vesicles are a major contaminant of gradient-enriched
    > human immunodeficiency virus type-1 preparations. Virol.
    > 230:125-133. (3) See the photos for yourself at
    > http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/award.htm (4)
    > http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/dtinterviewlm.htm
    >
    > (5) Medical Hypotheses (1988) 25: 151-162. Full text online at
    > http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/epmedhypo.htm (6) Abbot
    > Laboratories, HIVABtm HIV-1 EIA, May 1998
    > (7) Montagnier L, Olivier R, Pasquier C, eds. Oxidative stress in
    > cancer, AIDS and neurogenerative diseases. New York: Marcel Dekker
    > Inc, 1998. (8) Lower et al. The viruses in all of us:
    > Characteristics and biological significance of human endogenous
    > retrovirus sequences. Poc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA; 93: pp 5177-5184
    > (9) Factors Known to Cause False-Positive HIV Antibody Test
    > Results. Continuum; 4(3): 5. 64 references to conditions that can
    > cause false-positive HIV test results. (10)
    > http://www.robertogiraldo.com/eng/papers/EveryoneTestsPositive.html
    > (11) Papadopulous-Eleopulos E, Turner V, Papadimitriou JM & Causer
    > D. The Isolation of HIV: Has it Really Been Achieved? The Case
    > Against. Continuum (London) 1996; 4(3):S1-S24. (12) Lanka S. No
    > Viral Identification: No Cloning as Proof of Isolation. Continuum
    > (London) 1997; 4(5):31-33. (13) De Harven E. Remarks on Methods for
    > Retroviral Isolation. Continuum (London) 1998; 5(3):20-21. (14)
    > Wing MG. The Molecular Basis for a Polyspecific Antibody. Clin Exp
    > Immunol 1995; 99:313-315 (15) Snyder HW and Fleissner E.
    > Specificity of Human Antibodies to Oncovirus Glycoproteins:
    > Recognition of Antigen by Natural Antibodies Directed Against
    > Carbohydrate Structures. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 1980; 77:1622-1626.
    > (16) Barbacid M, Bolognesi d & Aaronson SA. Humans Have Antibodies
    > Capable of Recognizing Oncoviral Glycoproteins: Demonstration that
    > These Antibodies are Formed in Response to Cellular Modification of
    > Glycoproteins Rather than as Consequence of Exposure to Virus. Proc
    > Nat Acad Sci USA 1980; 77:1627-1621. (17) Papadopulos-Elepulos E.
    > Reappraisal of AIDS - Is the Oxidation Induced by the Risk Factors
    > the Primary Cause? Medical Hypothesis 1988; 25:151-162. (18)
    > Giraldo RA. AIDS and Stressors II: A Proposal for the Pathogenesis
    > of AIDS. In: AIDS and Stressors. Medellín, Colombia: Impresos
    > Begón, 1997: 57-96.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 14 2003 - 00:01:48 MDT