"AIDS began with a falsehood and ended in tragedy"

What is AIDS?

AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) is a collection of diseases with many different symptoms. AIDS causes the immune system to become weakened and suppressed, with low T cell counts (part of white blood cells). Kaposi Sarcoma, TB, Dementia, Pneumonia, Weight Loss, Diarrhea, Syphilis, Malaria, Leukemia and other cancers are just some of the diseases that make up AIDS. (This list is non-exhaustive, and they keep adding to it).

What is HIV?

HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) is a retrovirus, therefore harmless, isn't "new" and is produced IN the body BY the body under certain conditions. This was known prior to the AIDS establishment being built from the "HIV causes AIDS hypothesis" introduced in the early 1980's. Despite this fact, the AIDS establishment today is one of the most influential and powerful within the medical industrial complex, with literally billions upon billions of dollars being pumped into AIDS research within the narrow scope of its own boundaries, that being, that HIV is definitely the cause of AIDS and therefore none of the funding should go into any other hypothesis. And it doesn't, at least not from the main funding sources of the AIDS establishment, mostly the National Institute of Health (NIH).

AIDS was the first Political Disease, consuming the most funding, the most media coverage and the most heartache than any other before it. But before we talk about the true causes of AIDS, let's have a look at the original HIV-AIDS hypothesis and how we got to this stage.

"HIV is the probable cause of AIDS" was printed in every major news outlet across the USA and then the world in 1984. But was this true? Who actually claimed this? And who can provide us with the scientific proof that HIV is the "probable" cause of AIDS? Not a single paper exists proving this hypothesis. It was Robert Gallo who said it publicly, on the back of French Virologist Luc Montagniers discovery of the HIV virus, although no scientist has made claim with supporting evidence that HIV actually causes AIDS, despite popular belief within the scientific community and the general population. Gallo stated this to the world before any publication of any scientific evidence confirming it, and it completely bypassed scientific review.

Robert Gallo

Luc Montagnier

The inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Dr Kary Mullis won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for his creation. The PCR is an amplification tool and not a diagnostic "test". It doesn't tell you if you are sick or not, although it was adopted for the use of HIV screening after the initial "HIV antibody test"(more on this further on).

Kary Mullis

Dr Mullis and other scientists, including Molecular Biologist Dr Peter Duesberg, Market Analysist, Author and Researcher, John Lauritson and other HIV "dissenters" have many times approached Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo and requested the paper that proves that HIV is the cause of AIDS, who claimed it? and WHERE is it published? This proved futile as the years went by as this paper, which was the basis for the whole HIV-AIDS hypothesis, didn't seem to even exist. When Dr Mullis approached Montagnier at numerous AIDS conferences in the 80's and early 90's, he would just refer him to the published data on SMON virus or walked away. This was shocking for Mullis considering Montagnier was the discoverer of the virus itself and being from the Pasteur Institute, was one of the top researchers of AIDS. If he didn't know, then it was safe to say that it was never there to begin with.

So, with Robert Gallo apparently discovering that HIV was the cause of AIDS (although it was only "assumed") and it hitting the media worldwide, it wasn't long before governments around the world rallied together as everyone demanded a "cure".

There is a deep seated bias for microbial causes of disease and explosive growth in funding for biomedical research which has built a powerful array of Government and private institutions with a large vested interest in laboratory medicine and biotechnology. Todays biomedical research establishment blocks ALL research that disagrees with the consensus view of infectious AIDS and pulls the biggest resources in all human history.

Before we move onto AIDS, let's go back before HIV and look at some of the previous apparent "infectious disease epidemics" and give a little context......

"Virus hunting" came into play on a massive scale post WWII. Federal science departments and agencies materialised to fund all kinds of research and monitor universities, laboratories and all government facilities forming into a bureaucracy and pushing all the creative geniuses aside. Since the "successes" of Pasteur's "Germ Theory" and "Robert Koch Postulates", scientists and doctors flocked to bacteriology. However, it was discovered that bacteria and fungus are found in us all, serve a purpose and don't cause disease, so they turned their sights to "viruses".

A "new disease" appeared in Japan in the 1950's called SMON (subacute myelo optico neuropathy) which produced polio-like symptoms in the host. This was blamed on an infectious disease by the virus hunters which created an "epidemic". This disease peaked in the summer and affected medical workers, mostly middle-aged women. They showed no blood abnormalities, no fever or rash. As the epidemic raged on, new symptoms were being reported, like blindness. They agreed on a clinical diagnosis and a research grant was provided, even without the so called "virus" being found.

About half of the SMON patients had previously been prescribed a diarrhea fighting drug called "Entero-Vioform" containing the active ingredient "Clioquinol" and the other half had received the compound "Emaform" for problems with the digestive tract. This was ignored for several years. SMON resurfaced but worse in older people and males this time so more money was pumped into research on SMON which was (at the time) the largest japanese research program ever dedicated to a single disease. A laboratory found that SMON patients had unbalanced levels of beneficial bacteria but could not "isolate" any microbe. Twelve years of wasted money which ended in absolutely nothing. The drug used by SMON patients had killed the rodents it was tested on. It didn't prove any neurological disorder, only how toxic the drug was. (It's still prescribed today......)

The drugs were producing side effects, as would be expected from the results of the animal testing. SMON was the result of clioquinol consumption and not a virus. This was unpopular for the virus hunters who met a strong resistance as the drug was being used to treat the very same abdominal symptoms found in SMON patients.

In 1970 there was a study of SMON patients at seven hospitals which showed that 96% of them definitely took clioquinol BEFORE the onset of disease. The most severe cases were taking the highest doses. This epidemic began very shortly after the approval of these drugs in Japan. They came clean, doctors ceased prescribing them and it ended. Removal of the toxin, removal of the disease. However, despite the truth coming out, virus hunters revived it several WEEKS later completely ignoring the FACT that SMON disappeared after the ban on clioquinol. Due to predictable media hysteria, SMON patients were committing suicide, people were avoiding "infected" loved ones, there was national panic. Eventually, law suits followed for victims of clioquinol, which many countries had already ceased using a decade prior. They were bribed not to testify in Japanese courts.

"Kuru" was another disease without a virus which produced neurological symptoms, much like Parkinsons. Scientists ground up the diseased brains of dead Kuru victims and injected it into the brains of monkeys like they did with polio. As the monkeys showed a drop in motor skills, it was attributed to the "kuru" virus and not the very act of injecting toxins into the brain.

A british naval surgeon, after several years of research, published a book with his findings on scurvy in 1953. He was rejected by the whole british medical establishment for 40 years. His research concluded what we now know today. Scurvy is a disease caused by lack of vitamin C and not a virus. "Beriberi" was another disease that was caused by processed milled white bread consumed after the french revolution, also blamed on a virus.

Pellagra was the most devastating vitamin deficiency epidemic of all, causing massive fear and panic though it wasn't infectious. The media was used again to frighten people. Some hospitals refused to treat pellagra patients, many of which, hid their symptoms. They tried to infect monkeys with the blood of pellagra patients without success but still couldn't let go of the infectious hypothesis even though there was no proof. They were too invested in microbes being the cause of disease.

Eventually a physician and epidemiologist named Joseph Goldberger made the obvious connection to diet and cured many of his own patients by changing it. He published his findings and was attacked by other doctors so he decided to conduct another experiment to show that it was not infectious. He, his wife and 14 of his coworkers injected themselves with samples of blood, feces, mucus and other bodily fluids from pellagra patients, none of which contracted pellagra but even with this scientific, repeatable proof, the general medical opinion was not budging. Niacin was the vitamin missing from pellagra patients. By 1930 and after Goldbergers death, diets had improved and bacteria hunting was drawing to a close.

Joseph Goldberger

As biomedical research exploded after WWII so did the "microbe hunting" and the next one to appear on the scene was neurosyphilis which disappeared after they stopped using arsenic to treat people and used penicillin instead. People in the 1950's were also being treated with Mercury, a now known and classified "neurotoxin" the most toxic non-radioactive substance known to man, causing severe brain and nerve damage. The doctors at the time were confusing the poisonous effects of chemicals with syphilis itself. This is very common in the medical field. Legionnaires disease, measles and mumps are some more examples of diseases not caused by a virus.

Simply finding a microbe isn't enough to convict it of causing disease. They exist in all of us and simply do a job, most of them completely harmless, only becoming a problem when other toxic habits are not discontinued in the host. Koch Postulates must apply in all cases to prove that a microbe causes a disease. They are the gold standard for bacteria and viruses and have been used for over 130 years. They didn't apply in any of the cases mentioned above. HIV doesn't even meet one of the four postulates.

Too many non-infectious diseases puts microbe hunters out of business and since the establishment of Pasteurs Germ Theory and Robert Koch, the medical establishment has never erred on the side of non-infectious causation of disease. Instead, thousands of lives have been lost by misdirected prevention and treatment of non-infectious diseases with drugs and "therapies" including vaccines.

Since the massive increase in scientists and doctors over the years and literally thousands and thousands of published papers on microbes, there has been a massive overgrowth in scientific ranks. There is always competition between ever increasing numbers of scientists for sources of funding which restricts freedom of thought and appeals to the majority. Thinkers of outside of the box are a direct threat to their research. Unfortunately, scientists today pride themselves on molding data to fit the popular scientific belief and when someone questions it, they close ranks to protect their consensus belief. This is why we very rarely, if ever, see the other side of the debate. It's completely shut down as we can see today during the covid scamdemic.

Retrovirologists call the shots in science and decide who gets the most funding. Their voices carry enormous weight and when they choose to blame a retrovirus for any disease, all governments and media respectfully and blindly co-operate.

Most scientific funding comes from the NIH and every scientist knows they couldn't hope to make a career without a research grant from them. They are carefully selected into the peer review system which ensures the consensus is protected. Scientists access to funding, promotion, publication in journals and invitations to conferences are controlled solely by his peers. A huge conflict of interest. NIH budget in 1955 was $100 million, in 1994 it was $10 billion and by 2018, a whopping $30 billion, which no doubt has since increased "due to covid". They fund colleges, universities and other institutes, including in other nations.

Most virus hunters are chasing harmless viruses, finding ways to cash in since biomedical research funding has exploded. For example, Hepatitis C testing kits that were produced and sold generated $60 million without a virus being found. Does this sound familiar? Someone's getting rich......

I do appreciate that i've still not got to the crux of this blog, the HIV issue, but this is needed for some context, it's much easier to see with the bigger picture, especially in terms of the mainstream scientific and medical establishment, it's important to see how they work and what has happened previously.

The "slow-virus" concept (latent period) is the original sin against the laws of virology and was used to connect HIV to AIDS. Latent, slow or defective viruses cannot kill cells, which is well known in virology, so eventually achieved prominence as hypothetical causes of cancer and other degenerative diseases like AIDS. From this, the "War on Cancer" was declared and by using aggressive lobbying, virus hunting became the dominant force in science and still is today. As infectious diseases were rapidly on the decline at the beginning of the 20th century, cancer was on the rise, so early microbiologists began applying their tools to the chase of hypothetical cancer-causing germs. They tried to blame viruses but cancer isn't contagious. Tumour biologists couldn't find viruses in human cancers they studied so they used the excuse of a "latent period" from infection to disease, or a "slow virus".

The cervical cancer fear campaign initially started in the 1970's and the microbe blamed was HPV (Human papilloma virus) which was apparently a sexually transmitted virus. Fearful myths were presented in the pharmaceutical owned mainstream media, frightening people and blaming them for spreading "unknowingly" and essentially CREATED the crisis. I hope, at this point in the blog, you are pulling the parallels to the crises we are living today.....

Most cancers are a disease of old age, or at least they used to be. It equates to a lifetime of poisoning, or as the case is in 2022, a very short lifetime for many, unfortunately. This is attributed directly to the amount of poison that we ingest, which is much more than we did 30 years ago. Long term smoking and long use of oral contraceptives are two of the many risk factors for cervical cancer.

As the hunt for the first human retrovirus accelerated, at the same time, by sheer coincidence, the crucial technology emerged to tackle it.....HIV came on the scene. A huge well financed establishment of scientific research teams had been set up and dozens of biotech companies popped up at the same time to mass produce HIV tests, HIV vaccines and anti-retroviral drugs. AIDS became huge almost overnight. Less than 2 years after the first five cases, the syndrome officially became the Federal Governments top health priority.

The Centre of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was established after the second world war in 1946 and became in charge of the nations so called "epidemics". They were utilised to detect early signs of biological warfare as well as "hypothetical epidemics", quarantine measures and vaccines.

The Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) was born from the CDC five years later in 1951 and composed of 23 young medical graduates who were given 6 weeks of epidemiological training and were assigned for 2 years to local health departments and hospitals around the country. They were the eyes and ears of the CDC, nicknamed the "medical CIA". Each summer since then, more carefully chosen recruits come to the EIS. They are no longer in the public view, members were only disclosed up until 1993.

Over the past 7 decades, thousands of EIS members went on to work at various agencies within government and many of them stayed at the CDC. Surgeon Generals were given top positions at the World Health Organisation (WHO), health departments of foreign nations, public health programs and local health departments, big pharmaceuticals, risen through the ranks of insurance companies, some became prominent in media positions and senior editors of medical journals. Whatever job they take, they remain loyal to the CDC.

The EIS only need 2 cases in the same place to declare a possible epidemic. Just TWO cases. However, "clusters" of sickness prove nothing, other than they have been exposed to the same toxin, or something is missing from the diet, a vitamin/mineral deficiency (also caused by toxins). They reported many false alarms over the years causing mass panic but which didn't ever materialise. In 1994 it was "hantavirus", in 1995 it was Ebola, SARS, swine flu, BSE, measles, asian flu, spanish flu, MERS, the list is endless. The hype from the CDC in space suits using CGI (Computer generated imagery = cartoons) of these so called "viruses" is astonishing, they still do this today.

There are many outbreaks of disease that go completely unnoticed and the patients return to normal health when the toxin has been removed. This is never highlighted because it needs to be frightening in order to round up public interest (and more money). They are simply down to immunodeficiencies and toxic habits but the CDC use these normal outbreaks for it's inexhaustible sources of epidemics. They will continue to do this for as long as the general public are prepared to put up with it. The problem is, most people have no idea of the truth, although it seems that this massive scam has shaken many more into the real world and hopefully into action.

"The CDC increasingly needs a major epidemic to justify its existence" - Contagious epidemics have proven most effective at mobilising public interest and vast amounts of public money.

In 1957, the CDC warned of the Asian Flu epidemic despite flu being a benign disease. They revived the "spanish flu" of 1918 to scare the masses and it worked (of course). Just as a side note at this point, the "spanish flu" was not contagious. It was due to severe vaccine damage. 1918 was the first year that ALL servicemen had to receive ALL available vaccinations at once. It was an "experiment" gone wrong (or maybe not). I will cover the spanish flu in another blog. My point here was that it was not an "infectious disease".

But with heightened "surveillance" of Asian Flu and panic among officials and the public, it helped to feed the false impression of another impending epidemic. Since Asian flu the CDC has regularly produced vaccines for the flu that are ineffective and dangerous.

1975 gave us the "Swine Flu" epidemic. The EIS chased down all small clusters of flu and called for an aggressive vaccine emergency. Congress were easily manipulated (or corrupted) by the CDC's alarmist rhetoric. Hundreds of cases of paralysis (polio) poured in from the side effects of the vaccine with at least 75 deaths. The CDC director at the time was struck off for this fiasco.

The AIDS epidemic became their salvation as the "War on Cancer" was dying down. The inherent danger of infectious disease would quickly unite health care workers, scientists and journalists to stem the possible danger to the health of the general population, then the virus hunters could exploit.

Michael Gottlieb was a physician and immunologist from America who discovered the first 5 AIDS cases which were all homosexuals. Gottlieb knew what this could mean for his career and after failing to bend the rules on publication he contacted the CDC, who were only too glad to receive this news. The CDC hurriedly publicised without delay.

Michael Gottlieb

Despite the 5 victims from LA having no contact with each other, they wasted no time in suggesting it was a Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI). Gottlieb's paper was published on June 5th 1981. The other common factors not mentioned was that they all used recreational drugs, specifically, nitrate inhalants (poppers). Once the paper was published, new cases were being reported to the CDC, some who had suffered Kaposi Sarcoma (lung cancer) All known patients were using poppers to facilitate intercourse and maintain erections. Nitrates were known to be toxic. The men turning up with rare and fatal diseases had all spent years in extremely promiscuous homosexual activity, generally involving hundreds and sometimes thousands of sexual contacts. The CDC accepted this very small cluster of disease as proof of the infectious hypothesis. They held meetings with the Red Cross and blood supply associations demanding immediate screening procedures. This so called "epidemiological evidence" was basically this cluster study of 5 people. The CDC then used public relations to plant stories on AIDS in the media in 1983.

Director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Disease (NIAID) which is a branch of the NIH, Dr Anthony Fauci (oh yesssss, here he is again) set up his own AIDS program under his own supervision and viruses replaced poppers as the focus of research. This "new" syndrome would be contagious, caused by a retrovirus with a long latent period between infection and disease. There was and still is ZERO scientific basis for this but it became the adopted thinking within the scientific community and the general public.

Anthony Fauci

Robert Gallo's papers (the man who claimed HIV caused AIDS but never proved it) were never peer reviewed before press release - if they had been, it would have been picked up that no virus had even been found in ANY of Gallo's AIDS patients, only antibodies. Retroviruses do NOT kill cells.

On the day of the press release, Gallo quietly filed his patent application for the antibody test. Although Gallo's track record was poor, he still held one of the most powerful positions at the NIH. He had plagiarised many other scientists work and he was flat out misrepresenting and lying to his peers and the general public. Many exposés came out about him in the late 1980's and he was eventually convicted of scientific misconduct in 1992 a long with a few others for money laundering. Another scientist using Gallo's laboratory was testing vaccines on Africans, from 19 volunteers, 3 died.

In 1987 the WHO were forecasting that 100 million people would be infected by 1990 after scaring the shit out of everyone, based on nothing at all. They carried on with their fear campaign as always and the CDC and the NIH then announced that HIV could be found in saliva and could transmit. This obviously led to public nervousness in toilets etc. They said that 50%-100% of everyone carrying the virus would die and that there was an unpredictable "latent period" between infection and AIDS that ranged from 5-10 years, during which, carriers could infect many people. This was merely guesswork and has since very much proven to be.

AIDS victims suffer slow deaths and have many symptoms of disease, with their white blood cells (T-cells) at extremely low levels or completely wiped out. This could cause a cold to kill the patient as well as causing brain degeneration, dementia and other neurological disease.

The public response to all of this was inevitable and created two political camps, the Civil Rights Activists for the HIV positive and those championing health rights for the HIV negative. To protect the victims they brought in condoms and provided heroin addicts with sterile needles.

Believing AIDS would kill everyone, alarmists called for drastic public health measures by Government. They insisted on mandatory HIV testing, even those who were not sick (or in todays terminology, those who are "asymptomatic") and to medical workers and those in AIDS risk groups. They ordered for contact tracing of infection and reportability to Government agencies, possible quarantine and tourism restrictions. (they never achieved their goal back then, but clearly, they managed to do it this time around, 30 years later with covid).

By the 1990's there were over 100,000 studies/papers written on the HIV-AIDS hypothesis which was unprecedented in any other virus and not a single life has been saved. The epidemiologists assumed that the clinicians were accurately diagnosing. The virologists trusted the statistics of the epidemiologists. The immunologists placed confidence in the virologists laboratory experiments and the Computer Modelling experts believed them all.

There was so much pressure to conform, Koch Postulates were completely overlooked. The four postulates are as follows and they MUST apply to prove causation.

1 - The offending "microbe" MUST be found in ALL cases of patients with the disease and not found in healthy patients.

2 - The microbe MUST be isolated from a diseased patient and grown in pure culture.

3 - The microbe MUST cause the same disease when introduced into a healthy patient.

4 - The microbe MUST be re-isolated from infected host and be identified as being identical to the original invading microbe.

They forgot the very basis of virology! HIV doesn't fit the first postulate, never mind the remaining three.......and if it doesn't fit the first one in any case, the rest will likely not fit either. When you've done enough research in this field, you will notice that none of the so called "viruses" that they have attempted to terrify us with, satisfy Koch Postulates. There are other blogs on my website on the true nature of viruses for those who want to look further.

HIV is not found in most AIDS patients and only behaves as a harmless passenger virus, like ALL retroviruses. The abundance of uninfected T Cells (white blood cells) in all AIDS patients is the fatal argument against "high viral loads". It means there is no virus there to infect them and the absence of them disqualifies HIV as a player in AIDS. First postulate not satisfied.

The initial test for HIV was the "antibody" test, before PCR was used (even without the virus, more on this later) and this test simply identified if the patients had antibodies to HIV. In the real world this means absolutely nothing. In fact, for 200 years previously, ALL medical professionals were taught that if antibodies are present then the host is protected, the immune system has done it's job! considered a GOOD thing! The HIV test ironically proves the innocence of it! It's exactly like the Lateral Flow Tests (LFT) people are continually taking today for absolutely NO reason whatsoever, other than they have been told to do so. We all know at this point that the LFT is widely inaccurate and about as useful as a chocolate teapot in "diagnosing" disease, as is the PCR, considering that it's not a diagnostic tool, as repeatedly stated by it's creator, Dr Kary Mullis. The HIV test consistently generated false positive results and the negative tests weren't even recorded! Like has happened with Covid, skewing statistics from the very beginning means we will never know the real numbers.

After messing about in petri dishes to activate the dormant virus, starving and poisoning it (which is the very reason WHY the cells die and nothing to do with a virus - please refer to my blog on viruses for an in depth explanation and why this is vital to understand) the cells start to die and other cells become "infected". This, in their eyes is the "proof" of viral activity! Robert Gallo struggled with the second postulate and this is why he claimed Luc Montagnier's work as his own.

HIV is NOT sexually transmitted despite the common belief among the majority of people that it is. However, HIV positive mothers to infant has a 50% chance of transmission. This explains why the number of people with HIV has remained so constant. In Africa, mothers have been passing it down for a long time.

The higher the health risk, the more chance of having HIV which makes it the surrogate marker for the REAL cause of AIDS. There are millions of people who are HIV positive and completely healthy. Acquiring at birth through HIV positive mothers means nothing because a positive case of HIV means nothing, as discussed previously. HIV fails to kill T Cells in laboratory conditions, it makes cells grow faster, doing the complete opposite of what they claim it does. This is typical of all harmless retroviruses.

AIDS doesn't meet the classical epidemiological criteria on infectious disease. Infectious diseases don't discriminate between sexes. In the 1990's 92% of AIDS patients were male, and by 2018 it was 73%. Infectious diseases also don't select victims only from specific risk groups. HIV and AIDS epidemics follow two completely different time courses, so couldn't be linked.

Molecular Biologist Dr Peter Duesberg was one of the biggest HIV "dissenters". He was an incredibly well respected scientist and up until this point, had no problem receiving funding from the NIH for his work. Duesberg was given research funding in 1985 and was invited to write a special paper by the editor of "Cancer Research". He ended up with a laboratory on a different floor in the same building as Robert Gallo. He asked Gallo questions about the HIV-AIDS hypothesis on numerous occasions which he managed to dodge like a bullet. Even so, his co-workers admitted the problem of not finding active virus in AIDS patients to Duesberg. His paper was published 2 years later in 1987. Not one scientist has ever come forward to answer the paper on HIV. Usually this shows that it's irrefutable and victory for the author. None of the influential AIDS scientists have ever published a defense of HIV and they all answer with similar arguments.

Peter Duesberg

AIDS cases rose in direct correlation with higher drug use following the Vietnam War. As explained at the very beginning of this blog, AIDS is a syndrome of many different diseases which all cause immunodeficiency. AIDS statistics have massively increased over the years, yet HIV numbers have remained the same, flat. Nevertheless, with the stroke of a pen, an illusion of AIDS is created.

The ultimate epidemiological test for HIV would be a case-controlled comparison. A large number of infected V uninfected to be monitored for a long period of time. They would be matched with age, sex, income and health status and if HIV was harmful then the infected patients would all develop AIDS or die and the uninfected would not. Out of over 100,000 studies/papers on AIDS, this has never been done.

John Lauritson, activist, market research analysist and author, was researching the AIDS controversy and read through all of the data. He concluded that HIV was not infectious and suspected that some lifestyle or environmental factor was the cause. He was correct. He and homosexual rights activist Hank Wilson, who was against the use of poppers because of their toxicity started campaigning together. Lauritson was the first journalist to interview Dr Peter Duesberg. John called the CDC and the NCI beforehand to ask questions about HIV but the press officers didn't know what Koch Postulates were and asked him if they were "relevant" today. He hit brick walls all over the place so he ended up self publishing a book in 1990 called "Poison by Prescription, the AZT story" and in 1993 he published another - "The AIDS War, Propaganda, Profiteering and Genocide from the Medical Industrial Complex".

John Lauritsen

Duesberg entered the debate in 1989. Although other scientists were starting to dissent, they ran into the same political pressures that had plagued other dissenters. Dr Albert Sabin was a very well respected virologist who agreed with Duesberg, calling the hysteria surrounding it "absolute madness". He said "Presence of a virus doesn't mean anything in and of itself, HIV is rare in AIDS patients is enough to show that it's not the cause." - This was short lived and after pressure from the NIH he never defended Duesberg again. He died in 1993.

Albert Sabin

Walter Gilbert was another HIV dissenter in favour of Duesberg's work. He was a professor of biology who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for his modern technique for sequencing DNA in 1980. He argued strongly that no-one had proven AIDS was caused by HIV and stated, without an animal model you cannot establish Koch Postulates.

Walter Gilbert

The burden of proof in science is on those who propose a hypothesis, not on those who question it.

The most unexpected turnaround came from Luc Montagnier himself, stating at a conference in 1990 that HIV alone was not the cause of AIDS but another co-factor. The reason for Montagnier's sudden change of heart isn't very well known. The year before in 1989, a debate was set up between him and Peter Duesberg via the journal of immunology. Duesberg went first but heard nothing back, just more and more excuses from Montagnier until the journal went ahead and printed Duesberg's first installment of the debate. The response never arrived but Montagnier rushed to publish a paper speaking of a new bacterium, the pressure was well and truly on. He started to repeat Duesberg's arguments including low levels of HIV present in AIDS patients, the latent period problem and that a large number of people infected with HIV don't get AIDS. He never mentioned Duesberg's name.

Whenever the HIV-AIDS hypothesis is gone against, it brings trouble for the dissenter. AIDS top public relations man and Director of the NIAID, Dr Anthony Fauci once said; "Journalists who make too many mistakes, or who are sloppy, are going to find their access to scientists may diminish".

The AIDS establishment completely blocked Duesberg from speaking at any AIDS conferences. He was supposed to be appearing on a show to be interviewed but the NIH intercepted and stopped it. On another occasion when Duesberg was due to air on "Good Morning America" it was cancelled. He was flown to New York and put up in a hotel ready for the next mornings interview but was called the night before and said they had to cancel. The next morning when Duesberg switched on the TV, he saw Dr Fauci had filled his spot promoting the HIV-AIDS hypothesis. This story repeated itself twice with CNN and happened many other times. Whenever he was cancelled, Fauci would fill his spot, they were silencing him.

The media either ignored or attacked Duesberg and any interest from journalists was quashed. Nobody wanted to cover the debate so many were able to attack his position by not allowing him to respond (only small independent outlets were willing to cover it). The AIDS establishment averted serious media publicity so then they turned towards attacking Duesberg in scientific circles.

A scientists career depends heavily on peer-review grant money. Whenever Duesberg was due to debate Robert Gallo on a public platform, Gallo would back out making excuses, just as he avoided his questions when they worked in the same building. This should be evident that he was scared to face him and his hypothesis. Duesberg was 1 of only 2 out of its 128 year history to have his paper rejected by the journal "Proceedings". The other was Linus Pauling who argued that vitamin C may prevent cancer........and he was also correct as we now know.

The AIDS establishment now went after the lifeblood of any scientists lab, his funding source. In 1985 the NIH awarded Peter Duesberg an "Outstanding Investigator Grant" designed to give accomplished scientists freedom to explore new ideas and directions without having to apply for constant funding, (this was for 7 years). It was discontinued just as it was supposed to be renewed.

More nonsense came out in articles and journals that Fauci had apparently headed a study showing that only those with HIV developed AIDS regardless of drug abuse. This was a lie as months later they started to unravel. There were misleading statistics on poorly collected data. Every one of the thousand patients in this study was a homosexual who had used nitrates in addition to cocaine and amphetamines, 84% had also been on AZT prescriptions (more on this later). There was no control study with AIDS patients who hadn't used drugs. Even in their own study they omitted 45 patients with AIDS diseases but without HIV which adjusted the outcome of HIV-antibody - AIDS correlation to 100%.

All of Duesberg's grants were turned down after this. One was meant for testing the health hazards of nitrate inhalants in mice. He applied with a well respected toxicologist becoming the "Duesberg-Raabe Proposal" but it got rejected as it would be too damaging to the HIV-AIDS hypothesis. They tried to change it leaving out HIV/AIDS and focusing on recreational drug use or the use of inhalants and Kaposi Sarcoma. This was also rejected which was absolutely absurd considering they were a decade into an epidemic of drug use and had spent $35 billion! Remarkable!

The HIV dissidents were growing steadily and they all came together in 1991. Dr Charles Thomas, Professor of Biochemistry recruited scientists from all over the world for "Rethinking AIDS". Membership consisted of those financing themselves or near retirement and they couldn't get anything published in prestigious medical journals. It was a hard fight so he set up his own group - "Scientific reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis" and by 1995 there were more than 400 members. Journals were rejecting HIV dissenters, which keeps scientists in line more often than not. The "Science" journal did eventually publish for them.

Long term drug use is the culprit in most AIDS cases. When physician Michael Gottlieb diagnosed the first ever AIDS patient in Los Angeles he dutifully noted that he was a 30 year old active homosexual using Amyl Nitrates (poppers). The other four patients included in the first five AIDS cases all had completely different symptoms, Pneumocytis Carinii Pneumonia (PCP), Kaposi Sarcoma and TB. The only thing holding them together was that they all had antibodies to HIV. Gottlieb's first patient didn't even have the test as the virus was not yet discovered. African AIDS patients are routinely diagnosed with AIDS without having the HIV test.

Drug use and AIDS is the same epidemic. Heroin use in particular, tripled between 1960 and 1990 with many deaths from overdoses. Cocaine was even worse and there were millions of users with Crack becoming a huge problem in the 1980's. By 1990 there was an increase of 20,000% in ONE decade of cocaine use! Cocaine overdoses exploded from victims admitted to hospitals and rose from 3,000 in 1981 to 120,000 in 1993, a 4,000% increase. If you think these figures are bad then you'll be horrified with todays figures. The 1990's was the decade of opioid consumption on an explosive scale - "pain medications" such as "oxycontin" played an ENORMOUS part in the opioid epidemic we are living through today. I will write another blog on this epidemic when i've finished this one. It's terrifying and it needs to be recognised and somehow resolved, families are being torn apart and people are dying at a higher rate than guns and car accidents, once again at the hands of the pharmaceutical industry.

The CDC doesn't ask AIDS patients about drug use other than intravenously. They aren't bothered because they are looking for the spread through the needle, hence the "clean needle program". The drug itself, heroin, cocaine or whatever it may be, is likely much more dangerous than the dirty needle.

Remaining AIDS cases are mostly male homosexuals - a special subset of sexually hyperactive, promiscuous men. This lifestyle emerged in the 1970's together with the new drug use epidemic, appearing from the bath houses, disco's and sex clubs, accumulating hundreds, sometimes thousands of sexual contacts within just a few years. Influenza and Hepatitis B became commonplace. Heavy doses of antibiotics were taken each night before sex to prevent sores. Extreme sexual activity requires stimulants to keep going, nitrates to allow intercourse and downers to unwind. Several drugs combined with alcohol and pot became the evening routine.

Here is a list of drugs that many HIV positive people also took recreationally; alcohol, amylnitrates, barbiturites, butylnitrates, cocaine, crack, ecstasy, heroin, librium, LSD, mandrex, MDA, MDM, seconal, special k, THC, tuiriol, mescaline, meth, mushrooms, PCP, purple haze, quaaludes and valium. Microbes that are common in these individuals are; candida infections, chlamydia, cytomegalovirus, epstein-barr, gonoreah, hepatitis A, B, C or D, herpes, scabies, veneral warts and other parasites. They also ingested large amounts of anti-biotics, anti-fungals and anti-parasites. In almost all the cases, the diseases were contracted before HIV diagnosis.

With regular use of poppers, they became a sexual crutch. Many gay men were incapable of having sex, even solitary masturbation, without the aid of poppers.

Sexual activity is tightly linked to drug use. Drug using mothers produce sick children regardless of whether they are HIV positive or not, the more drugs used, the more damaged the infant. Injecting drug addicts, male homosexuals and the children of drug injecting mothers constitute 94% of all AIDS patients. The other 6% are blood transfusion receivers, giving the illusion of infection.

Mixing nitrates with water (in the body) turns to nitrous acid which destroys biological molecules, mutates DNA and is a powerful cancer-causing chemical. In contact with living cells they are cytotoxic (kill cells). It kills the lining of the lungs which causes pneumonia. This happens in animals too. It acts like carbon monoxide which destroys hemoglobin in the blood, preventing oxygen from reaching the body despite normal breathing. It can be fatal if too much is inhaled at one time.

During the height of the "popper craze" there was a large number of overdose victims that arrived at the hospital emergency rooms with as much as two thirds of their hemoglobin chemically destroyed. Kaposi Sarcoma (lung cancer) the primary AIDS disease solely affected male homosexuals that were using nitrates and left all other risk groups alone. It was found in the body, precisely where the nitrate fumes are concentrated the heaviest during use. Before poppers, nobody had ever been diagnosed with Kaposi sarcoma.

Pneumonia is the most common AIDS disease in the US and Europe. The CDC did a very short animal study using very low doses of nitrates in rats which showed only minor side effects. This was deliberate. Other laboratories used more realistic doses which all concluded that nitrates were toxic and destroyed the immune system.

Persistent drug users show a loss of white blood cells which are the cornerstone of the immune system. Lymph node swelling, fever, rapid weight loss, brain dysfunction, vulnerability to infection, dementia, malnutrition and chronic intoxication is a disaster.

The common denominator of high morbidity and mortality of intravenous drug users has been the drug itself, irrespective of HIV infection. Wasting diseases of AIDS are actually side effects of taking amphetamines, to which anti-biotics (Tetracycline) became the panacea and the most popular, often being taken beforehand to suppress any infection (from drugs). It interfered with normal metabolism and caused immune suppression in the long term. Killing helpful bacteria can cause yeast and fungal infections.

African AIDS was completely manufactured. The media blew this up and created an epidemic in Africa when there wasn't one. Out of 350,000 HIV positive cases, only 0.5% of them had AIDS. In Africa where there was AIDS, there was money available and so many African doctors jumped on board. A patient who has TB and who is HIV positive would appear exactly the same as a patient with TB who is HIV negative. They would both clinically present with fever, weight loss and a prolonged cough.

Reclassification of all other diseases came under the AIDS umbrella (sound familiar?covid=flu). An African doctor sarcastically said "Today, because of AIDS, it seems that africans are not allowed to die from these conditions any longer". They also misdiagnosed diabetes and malaria as AIDS. Many patients with treatable illnesses were condemned to AIDS and AZT. The only place they could go for treatment after the AIDS establishment took over, was to the WHO hospitals who were only there for AIDS. If your leg had been blown off you were still having a "test" and going down as an "AIDS patient" if you tested positive, regardless whether you had symptoms or not. Does this ring any bells with regards to todays crisis? County health departments were getting funding and putting pressure on doctors to not miss an "AIDS patient" and to report it to them.

The only way doctors could tell the difference between AIDS and other conditions was by testing for antibodies against HIV! And as we've discussed, the test was unreliable and worthless. There were several large studies conducted which showed that among thousands of randomly selected africans with standard AIDS diseases, that fewer than half were HIV positive. The AIDS figures out of Africa are pure lies, everything was classed as AIDS. Africa is a third world country with huge cocaine and heroin problems, malnutrition and poor hygiene. The logic of the AIDS establishment is to provide them with condoms.........

AIDS was a thoroughly publicised epidemic that began with a falsehood and ended in tragedy. It revived virus hunting and it was growing right in line with recreational drug use. There were and still are so many involved, everyone was won over. There was so much money to be made for the molecular biologists, biochemists, crystallographers, virologists, animal researchers, epidemiologists and pharmacologists as vaccines would need to be invented. The common denominator was that all AIDS research was predicated entirely on HIV and even with all the money pouring in, there was no room for alternative hypothesis'.

They kept changing the rules and constantly issuing mixed signals and conflicting information. AIDS presented the first opportunity in years to revive old public health campaigns that they tried to implement years before the CDC came along for yellow fever and the bubonic plague. They disappeared when people became healthier.

"Confronting AIDS" recognised the potential and recommended a 2-step program on education and widespread HIV testing. Education required advocating the use of condoms and sterile needles for injecting illicit drugs, targeted at EVERYONE and not only AIDS risk groups for fear of it being sexually transmitted and contagious. They were condoning drug use by giving out clean needles under the logic that it would prevent addicts from sharing dirty needles. This was extended to other nations especially Africa which increased aid to the WHO for public health measures and released a book with their action plan calling for quarantine, mass immunisation, restrictions on mass gatherings and restrictions on travel.....(just like the last 2 years....)

When it came to light that AIDS was not spreading outside of its risk groups and into the general population, David Rogers, Vice chairman of the National Commission on AIDS told a reporter "his group worked hard to try and make AIDS a concern to everyone. Now to have someone say, we can relax, I would much prefer them to say, you should worry about your own son and daughter".

The initial "Confronting AIDS" report has served as the unquestioned standard against which the entire AIDS establishment has measured itself and it also controls its potential opposition. Anyone not joining in would have the label of being "apathetic" and everyone raising questions were in a state of "denial".

The NIH lashed billions into AIDS research and virtually all scientists marched along without hesitation. The job of inducing the non-scientists to march, fell upon the CDC through "education". The mission was to persuade the public to see HIV-AIDS as an infectious disease. They started pumping millions into HIV testing sites linked to "appropriate counselling" (defined by the CDC) ensuring that everyone tested would hear the "official" line on AIDS. By the early 90's at least 300 groups were funded directly or indirectly by the CDC. They continued to fund AIDS activist groups but then branched out into other segments of society. Tens of millions went to the Red Cross which gave the CDC immense control over them. Money was used for pamphlets, videos and guides throughout the country which helped spread their message worldwide.

Vast sums of money went into civil rights movements and health organisations, building special partnerships with powerful lobbies, elected representatives in State Government, health officials and school education through the Sexuality and Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) - this is going to be very important at the end of the blog, we'll come back to it.

They pulled both sides of the debate and funded both. The AIDS activist movement championed the distribution of condoms and clean needles and the religious right advocated for mandatory HIV testing, tracing of sexual contacts and quarantines. Both sides called for more funding, the CDC couldn't lose. They had an impressive hold over the media all across the world. It can promote fear with an AIDS explosion and hide the truth, creating an illusion of the spread of AIDS by redefining the syndrome. Many of HIV-free AIDS patients went unreported with pressure for towing the party line, doctors were aware but no-one puts their head above the parapet.

The medical opinion in the 1990's (and still to a degree today) is that recreational drugs and prescription medications are non-toxic. They think heroin isn't toxic as long as a clean needle is used. The AIDS epidemic is the result of the drug epidemic. The public would no longer have to fear microbes, but drugs. Thousands of people who were HIV positive would no longer have to accept their fate of AIDS and dying. Drug addicts could prevent diseases by getting help to stop taking drugs and hundreds of thousands would be spared the toxic HIV drug "AZT".

People often forget that before HIV came along (or was discovered) AIDS was characterised by many different diseases acquired by consumption of recreational drugs. Drugs are the most plausible explanation for a near perfect restriction of AIDS to these risks groups because drug consumption is their most specific common denominator.

The original drugs-AIDS hypothesis was called the "Lifestyle Hypothesis" - long term consumption, "the dose is the poison". Duesberg's drug hypothesis must be rejected and censored for "ethical reasons" they say......The knowledge of the drug hypothesis would call into question the HIV hypothesis and that means it would promote unsafe sex and its known consequences. Despite the escalating drug use epidemic, all drug-AIDS connections had been ignored since 1984.

In the 1990's there were between 3-8 million cocaine users and 600,000 heroin users in the USA. By 2018 there were over 43 million cocaine users and almost a million heroin users in the USA. One third of american AIDS patients are IV drug users yet not a single study exists from the NIH or the CDC or any drug agency that investigated long term effects of cocaine and heroin in animal models.

Millions of american homosexuals, including many with AIDS are addicted to nitrates but no long term studies exist of nitrate use in animals. As mentioned earlier, applications to study long term effects of recreational drugs consumed by 97% of all american AIDS patients are rejected by federal institutions, instructing the applicant that diseases of drug addicts are caused by HIV.

Immunodeficiency, weight loss, dementia and muscle atrophy account for losses of billions of human blood cells, muscle cells, brain cells and causes Kaposi Sarcoma. At recreational doses, cocaine, heroin and amphetamines work as catalysts, accelerating and altering normal human functions beyond normal tolerances. They are also indirectly toxic due to malnutrition, insomnia and lack of sanitation.

The HIV-AIDS hypothesis doesn't offer a plausible cause of AIDS. There's no authentic precedent in biology of a dormant gene having any effect, let alone cause a fatal disease. As it also fails to leave specific risk groups in more than 4 decades, it discredits the cause from a virus.

Pediatric AIDS in america and europe are restricted to babies being born to drug addicted mothers and 80% of prisoners are on illicit drugs. The spread of AIDS, spread of cocaine and cocaine-related hospitals are parallel since 1981.

"Latent periods of HIV" are simply reflections of the time the human host takes to accumulate sufficient drug dosage for AIDS to occur. For example, the time lag for a nitrate habit to Kaposi Sarcoma is 7-10 years, the same "latent period" as HIV apparently causing AIDS. IV drug users suffer from long term malnutrition and insomnia which are the primary causes of immunodeficiency. There is no evidence that HIV positive non-drug users have higher morbidity or mortality than HIV negative controls. An AIDS research centre in New York gave the key to long term survival with HIV. None had received anti-retroviral therapy and in addition they had given up recreational drug use.

IV drug users and homosexuals lose their T-cells prior to infection due to psycho-active drugs and sexual stimulants. Another study showed that 16% of the 2795 homosexuals had AIDS without ever acquiring HIV infection. The high drug use is being completely ignored as a factor. AIDS occurs without HIV infection and as the T-cells of drug addicts decrease prior to HIV then it can't be the cause of AIDS. Studies in drug addicts prove instead that HIV is just a marker for drug consumption. The more drugs consumed intravenously or for sex, the higher the risk of HIV infection. AIDS is cured by withdrawal from recreational drugs and by discontinuing AZT, despite HIV. Stopping AZT use improves AIDS. Incidences of AIDS among heroin and cocaine users was 20% as opposed to the control group who had stopped injecting which was 5% (from a study in 1990).

Maternal drug using gives babies AIDS despite HIV. 82% of 14,940 children born with HIV in the USA from 1978 -1993 were alive and well despite the presence of HIV. T-cells of african HIV positive patients with TB increases after proper nutrition is established.

The HIV hypothesis states that every infected adult and baby should have progressively lost T-cells and developed AIDS. This isn't observed. HIV positive patients recovered once freed of AZT and recreational drugs. The drugs-AIDS hypothesis makes sense and fits AIDS, the HIV hypothesis doesn't, it's simple.

The solution to the AIDS crisis would be to determine animal studies on drug toxicity over prolonged periods of time. Drug toxicity could also be tested epidemiologically in humans who are addicted to recreational drugs or prescribed AZT, by comparing their diseases with those of otherwise matched drug-free controls. This could easily be achieved at a fraction of the cost invested in the HIV hypothesis as forty years later, there are many, many more people on recreational and prescription drugs than ever, unfortunately.

Drugs toxicity funding is miniscule and all they do is test rats/mice with just one dose for short term effects, there are no long term studies.

AIDS officials used the many AIDS conferences and meetings as public relation victories, quite excruciatingly. I have viewed some footage from AIDS conferences back from the 90's and it's diabolical. Not allowing anyone opposed to the protected HIV hypothesis even in the room. There was absolutely NO room for debate and Robert Gallo acted despicably in response to questions asked to him about why Dr Duesberg was not invited to these events.

As long as a scientists work is reviewed only by his competitors within his own field, peer review will crush genuine science. The federal government has attained a monopoly on science and only a handful dominate the research policies and dictate official dogma, especially the NIH.

The biotech industry arose mainly to supply equipment to NIH funded labs and big pharmaceuticals, both feeding off NIH grants, some of which ends up back to the scientists for paid board positions who then sit in judgement of fellow scientists as peer reviewers. They decide whether the competitor should be funded or allowed to publish. There were MASSIVE commercial conflicts of interest, as there are today, even more so.

Fear of disease gives power to medical science, especially "infectious disease". In order to squeeze money, they declare a war on something. Fear propaganda is absolutely staggering. Switch off the TV.

Each risk group for AIDS have specific diseases. Kaposi Sarcoma is almost exclusively seen in homosexuals (due to nitrate inhalants), TB in IV drug users and pneumonia in hemophiliacs. AIDS diseases in hemophiliacs are virtually all immunodeficiency diseases whereas 39% of AIDS diseases in IV drug users and homosexuals are non-immunodeficiency diseases. Since AIDS diseases in hemophiliacs and non-hemophiliacs aren't the same, then their causes can't be.

All the evidence shows that AIDS is not infectious.....

- The virus fails on causation;

- AIDS was new, HIV was a long established retrovirus;

- All AIDS defining diseases occur in matched risk groups at the same rate, in the absence of HIV;

- There is no common active microbe in all AIDS patients;

- The virus-AIDS hypothesis failed to predict the epidemiology and pathology of AIDS;

- The NIH predicted AIDS would explode in the general population which never happened (remember when the "make-shift" hospitals were built for the apparent "explosion" of covid patients that never happened? Yep, literally millions of the taxpayers money to scare people to death, they were never used);

- American homosexuals had Kaposi Sarcoma 20 times more than all other american AIDS patients;

- IV drug users are prone to TB and crack smokers exhibit pneumonia and TB;

- 99% of hemophiliacs with AIDS have opportunistic infections;

- Nearly all recipients of transfusions have pneumonia;

- Users of AZT develop anemia, Leukopenia and nausea.

The HIV-AIDS Hypothesis states;

- HIV is sexually, parentally and perinatally transmitted;

- HIV causes immunodeficiency by killing T-cells, but on average only 10 years after infection in adults and 2 years after infection in infants (latent period) because the virus is assumed to become reactivated in AIDS;

- All AIDS diseases are consequences of this immunodeficiency.

Because of this "belief", thirty previously known and entirely unrelated diseases have been redefined as AIDS, provided they occur in the presence of HIV. Due to HIV's chronic inactivity (even in AIDS patients) it's only detectable indirectly via "antiviral antibodies" but they are only found half of the time.

Infectious AIDS would be predicted to;

- Spread randomly between sexes. In the 1990's, 92% of AIDS patients were male and today it's about 73%;

- Cause primary disease within weeks/months after infection;

- Generate a predictable pattern of symptoms.

By contrast, non-infectious AIDS, caused by toxins would be predicted to;

- Spread non-randomly, according to exposure of toxins;

- Follow intoxication after variable intervals as determined by life-time dosage and personal thresholds for disease;

- Manifest toxin and intoxication site. For example; Smoking and lung cancer or Alcoholism and liver cirrhosis.

The only evidence that HIV causes AIDS is epidemiological. 50% of all AIDS patients are confirmed and the remainder are presumptively diagnosed (no test). Antibody positive means virus negative. Immunodeficiency in hemophiliacs is directly proportional to the number of transfusions received over a life-time, with or without HIV.

Prior to the discovery of HIV, protein malnutrition was identified by Fauci et al as the worlds leading cause of immunodeficiency, particularly in underdeveloped countries! Over half of african AIDS patients are HIV free. HIV was presumed new in all countries because AIDS was new. This was the primary argument for the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, that first HIV was introduced and then AIDS appeared.

HIV in non-drug using prostitutes tends to be low or absent. In one country they had found a cross-contamination of HIV tests. 75% of prostitutes tested positive for HIV and they concluded that in 5 years, half of them would be dead. When they returned, none of them were dead so they said that it was a "new strain" of HIV that apparently didn't cause disease and magically protected them from the other "rampant" variants. This was published in "Nature" - incredulously. Unwanted pregnancies and veneral disease has increased significantly since HIV has been known, but not HIV infection. All infected HIV persons are said to die from AIDS after a latent period of around 10 years but not more than 3-4% of HIV positive americans or europeans and 0.3% of HIV positive africans develop AIDS each year.

In order to expand their market, they branched out from homosexuals to the black community, using Earvin Magic Johnson, the famous basketball player as the poster boy. Earvin did test positive for HIV and started on the "treatment" AZT. He became sick very quickly, stopped taking it and got better, although still carried on advertising it for the AIDS establishment as if he was still taking it. Freddie Mercury died from AZT, not AIDS. He tested positive with the useless test during the most intense point of the fear propaganda and his doctor prescribed AZT at the highest dose of 1200mg - he deteriorated quickly and was dead three months later.

Freddie Mercury

Earvin "magic" Johnson

They used a hospital in Brooklyn New York that had many IV drug users who were malnourished with TB and therefore had high rates of HIV. They used this to represent the whole of the american black community even though there were no cases in other inner cities of black communities. Less than 1% and they were using it to represent them all, intentionally misrepresenting statistics.

Epidemiologists have made apocalyptic predictions about the AIDS epidemic that raised fear and funding to unprecedented levels, yet the appearance of AIDS in america followed a massive escalation in consumption of psycho-active drugs which started after the Vietnam War.

32% american and 33% european AIDS patients are IV users of heroin, cocaine and other drugs. These include and are based on figures from 1990;

- 75% of all heterosexual AIDS cases in the US and about 70% in europe;

- 71% of american and 57% european females with AIDS;

- Over 10% american and 5% european are homosexuals;

- 70% american children born with AIDS, including 50% born to mothers who are confirmed IV drug users;

- 80-85% european children with AIDS born to drug addicted mothers.

All studies of american and european prostitutes indicate HIV infection is almost exclusively restricted to drug users, although these studies only mention HIV and not AIDS. Homosexual users of aphrodisiac drugs generated 60% of AIDS patients in risk groups with lots of sexual contacts, 100 in a year, 1000 over several years. These sexual activities are directly proportional to consumption of toxic sexual stimulants, including nitrate inhalants, cocaine, amphetamines plus more. Studies for AIDS risk factors were conducted and it was the same story each time. High drug use is the culprit.

Michael Gottlieb's first five patients were homosexuals who all consumed nitrates and presented with Pneumocytis Carinii Pneumonia (PCP). One study concluded that a "lifetime use of nitrates" was a 94-100% consistent risk factor for AIDS. A 58-fold higher consumption of nitrates by homosexuals compared to heterosexuals and lesbians correlates with a 20-fold higher incidence of Kaposi Sarcoma and a higher incidence of all other AIDS diseases in homosexuals, compared to most other risk groups. As nitrate use decreased from 1984-1991 the cases of Kaposi Sarcoma did too.

- Among 54 prisoners with TB in New York, 47 were street drug users but only 24 were HIV positive;

- A group of 21 long term heroin users showed a decrease in T-cells to below 1, which is typical of AIDS but only 2 were HIV positive;

- Thrombocytopenia and immunodeficiency were diagnosed in 15 IV drug users on average 10 years after they became addicted but only 2 of them were HIV positive;

- Weight loss, fever, night sweats, diarrhea and mouth infections were diagnosed in 49 out of 82 HIV negative and 89 out of 136 HIV positive long term IV drug users in New York;

- Degree of neurological damage of infants correlated directly with maternal drug consumption independent of HIV status. All mothers were drug users;

- 10 HIV negative infants born to IV drug addicted mothers had the following AIDS diseases; Failure to thrive, persistent generalised lymphadenopathy, persistent oral candidiasis and developmental delay;

In the early 1980's, T-cell ratios became measurable. T-cells averaging 1 or less were reported in addicts who had injected drugs for an average of 10 years.

Drugs are biochemically active as long as they are administered and thus are cumulatively toxic over time. 32% of american AIDS patients in the 1990's were IV drug users, 60% recreational drugs orally and unknown but a large percent of people in both clinical and behavioural AIDS risk groups used AZT.

Testing went from 0 in 1984 to 20 million in 1986. The apparent "exponential" spread on AIDS during this period is reflected in exponential AIDS "testing" (LFT.....do you see?) More "testing" means more "disease" despite level of health! It's a no brainer. AIDS can be prevented by stopping consumption of recreational and anti-HIV drugs but not by safe sex and clean needles. AIDS has continued to increase in all countries that has promoted safe sex and it's got a whole lot worse.

Looking back at the truth, it's now reasonable to say that the education should have been on the danger of drugs, since it's clear that consumption of drugs increases sexual activity on a scale never seen before and rising. The whole reason sex education was introduced to the whole world was based on this incorrect hypothesis. The argument that people knowing HIV isn't sexually transmitted will increase unsafe sex is ridiculous and dangerous. Awareness on drug use is paramount, which will in turn lower sexual activity, yet here we are, in 2022 spinning the same old rubbish and causing absolute devastation in more ways than one.

This "education" has led to a very dangerous time for all of our children. I have been helping the fight towards stopping the Comprehensive Sex Education now being taught from age three. I can't go into this right now because that in itself is a monstrous task, however, there are many videos on my website where I talk about this, along with my blog on the "sexual revolution" and where it has frighteningly taken us. There are a few organisations who have been on the front lines and fighting against these now "pedophile policies" including Public Child Protection Wales. You can find all the details on their website, as well as the fundraisers for us taking the Welsh Government to court in an effort to stop this immediately, hoping it will have a domino effect for countries already being subjected to this curriculum, which is many. Please find out as much information as you can. Awareness needs to be raised and fast. Even though I digress, when you discover what is going on with regards to this education, you'll realise how important this connection is.

The drug hypothesis is unpopular because of the consequences to the AIDS establishment and not because it's difficult to prove. It's paradoxical to assume that AIDS was new because HIV was "new". HIV is a long established retrovirus. It only "appeared" new because being a chronically latent virus, it became detectable only with the new recently developed technology. Drugs were the only new health risk, thus AIDS was new because the drug epidemic was new (and has significantly got worse in the last three decades).

Taking this blog into account so far, it's evident what the real cause of AIDS truly is but there is another part to this story which is paramount to write about. They terrified the world into believing if you had HIV it was a definite death sentence so they rallied around for the "cure" - conveniently.

What is AZT?

AZT - (Azidothymidine) is a DNA chain terminator designed in the 1960's as a chemotherapeutic. It failed to prolong the lives of leukemic animals so wasn't accepted for cancer therapy and was "shelved". In 1987 it was revived and used to treat symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers of HIV. In 1988, the designers of AZT won the Nobel Prize.

Many studies show that no more than 1 in 1000 lymphocytes (white blood cells) are ever infected by HIV, even in those dying from AIDS. AZT, like all other chemotherapeutic drugs, can't distinguish between infected and uninfected cells so 999 uninfected cells must be killed to kill just 1 HIV infected cell. Even if HIV did cause AIDS, the toxicity of AZT is huge and has zero benefit, only risk.

AZT was not only given to HIV positive but also HIV negative in the risk groups such as homosexuals and hemophiliacs, as well as babies born to HIV positive mothers to avoid progression to AIDS, people out of the risk groups and into the general population.

AZT is cytotoxic (kills healthy cells) destroying the bone marrow (where T-cells are made) causing life threatening anemia, severe headaches, nausea, muscular pain, wasting muscles, kidney, liver and nerve damage. It blocks DNA synthesis, the building blocks of life itself, new cells can't develop and the body deteriorates.

The belief in AZT's so called "benefits" appeared to be based on three bodies of evidence.

"Phase II double-blind placebo controlled trials" conducted by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA). Based on documents they were forced to release under a FOI, this trial was floored immediately. Both patients and doctors knew who was on what, the study was violated and therefore invalid. It gets much worse. Nobody was told the study became unblinded of course, until the FOI came to light. In fact, lots came to light from these documents.

Protocol violations were discovered and that most involved in the study used unauthorised drugs. Half way through, the trials were terminated and the placebo group were given the option to take AZT as it would be "unethical" to hold it back! How did they get to this conclusion?? The miracle was short lived as it didn't prevent them from dying. In 21 weeks 10% of the patients taking AZT were dead, in comparison to the apparent 1% the FDA told the world from these very trials. In other words, they lied and their own documents proved it.

Firstly, there was no evidence that AZT even had any anti-viral effect against HIV in the body, as opposed to the test tube. The researchers also didn't perform any autopsies on the patients who died and released no information on the causes of death. Since the study became unblinded, so many factors changed the outcomes of psychological issues and attitudes and the sicker patients were placed in the placebo group, intentionally....there was deliberate cheating going on.

Even the own FDA's analyst reviewing the pharmacological data said that AZT should NOT be approved after documenting many side effects, most notably, anemia.

Pharmaceutical Company Burroughs Wellcome were the manufacturers of AZT. Researchers connected with them and government and gave AZT to 21 children who were HIV positive claiming that it boosted their IQ by 15 points. 5 of the 21 children died but researchers were so impressed by the developmental improvements they recommended giving AZT to infected but asymptomatic newborns!

AZT is disastrous for the bone marrow which is where the T-cells are made. Doctors who prescribed AZT did so on the basis of very limited information along with the assurances from the PHS (Public Health Service).

The FOI from the FDA on the Phase II trials showed the dark underside of the double blind study. Falsification of data, sloppiness, confusion, lack of control with departures from the accepted procedures. Even the authors, when asked, couldn't explain their own data. They kept referring the market analysist to Burroughs Wellcome, the manufacturer of AZT.

The study of the trials were located at 12 medical centres throughout America. Each patient was intended to undergo a full 24 weeks of "treatment" either with AZT or the placebo. Midway through the trial one patient on AZT died and more than a dozen in the placebo group. The FDA said it would be unethical to continue the study since AZT was "prolonging life" so it was terminated. All patients were told what they were given and the placebo group were offered the option to take AZT.

Only 5% completed the full 24 weeks and 23 patients were treated for less than 4 weeks. On average, patients had received treatment for about 17 weeks at the time of the abortion of the study. It was a shambles. The patients could distinguish which pill was which from the taste and were swapping tablets. Many patients went into this trial believing that death was imminent without intervention with a new "wonder drug". For these people, the psychological consequences of finding out they were receiving the placebo must have been devastating. This could have well contributed to the high mortality in the placebo group.

On the basis of this unblinded, fraudulent study, FDA approval was neither proper nor legal. Documents were changed, dates were incorrect, no initials next to altered data, adverse reactions were sometimes crossed out months after initially recorded and some patients data was excluded altogether which were favourable to AZT being a "wonder drug".

One of the protocol violations was the unauthorised use of other drugs in addition to treatment in the study. The FDA had a meeting about all this bad data and still decided to use it, making the trial not only invalid but fraudulent. This is very bad science.

The FOI material released by the FDA show that both the FDA and Burroughs Wellcome were quite willing to bend the rules for the approval of AZT. It's not the first the FDA were in bed with the industry, this happens continually, as it does with the UK equivalent, the MHRA.

Causes of death were not verified by autopsy which would have shown whether traces of AZT or any other drugs were found in the placebo deaths. The FDA refused to release the medical records of the patients who died because of "confidentiality" which was absolute nonsense, they could have blotted out the names, clearly just an excuse and a loop hole. There were completely inadequate causes of death, lack of autopsies and a resistance to releasing medical records, an FDA analysist said the following;

"Of particular concern is the possibility that the hematologic toxicity of the drug when administered over a prolonged period of time may eventually debilitate patients to such an extent that they may become less able to resist opportunistic infections and other complications of HIV disease, than if they had been left untreated".

Patients treated with AZT in trials experience significant toxicity. Macrocytosis (enlarged red blood cells, associated with anemia) occurred in 69% of AZT patients but none of the placebo patients, which played a massive role in un-blinding the study.

In addition to this study, many other experiments were performed on AZT which further demonstrated high toxicity of the drug and suggested AZT as a potential carcinogen.

The fear behind HIV-AIDS is incredible. They said the AIDS virus would almost certainly kill everyone it infects unless effective drugs were developed. A study called "AIDS infection proving fatal in all cases" stated that everyone with HIV antibodies would develop AIDS. The public health officials hoped the new study would "encourage those at high risk to be tested and seek medical attention". Even in patients dying of AIDS, HIV remains biochemically inactive (like all retroviruses).

Lifestyles of heavy drug use, veneral diseases with frequent antibiotic treatment, unhealthy and dangerous sexual practices are quite sufficient to cause immune deficiency with or without HIV infection. Only 1 out of 87 HIV infected men in New York ended up with AIDS, all the others had perfectly normal immune systems as opposed to 25% of the San Francisco study who got AIDS. The difference was "lifestyle" in those 2 areas, HIV had nothing to do with the outcome.

There are many books on survivors of AIDS that speak about tremendous pressure from their doctors and peers to take AZT. They discuss the hopes, delusions and subsequent disappointment involving the drug, including the very real and horrible side effects. Technically AZT is a poison by definition as it's cytotoxic (kills healthy and infected cells).

The AZT "philosophy" says that "AIDS is a terminal disease" and physicians who accept this premise may be able to prescribe AZT in good conscience and since people with AIDS are considered to be facing imminent death, the cumulative toxic effects can be ignored.

Burroughs Wellcome set their sights on reporting a "10 month survival" for the AZT recipients but by this time they had lost control over the study. Almost 1 out of 4 patients had been lost, researchers didn't know whether 1120 patients were dead or alive and if they were still alive, whether or not they were still using AZT.

There were 4805 total patients, 59% were reported alive, 18% reported dead and 23% had been lost. Burroughs Wellcome abused the statistics with guess work had they not lost 1/4 of their study sample. This is fraud. They stated that if all the lost patients were still alive and on AZT, the survival rate at 10 months could be estimated to be as high as 82%. On the other hand, if all lost patients had died, the survival rate would be estimated at 64%. They added together these 2 percentages and divided them by 2 to get an average of 73%, which they stated as factual figures and not "ESTIMATED TO BE" like it really was.

Since the focus of this study was survival, what happened to the 847 patients who died? It's extremely disconcerting that the most frequent cause of death was described as "unspecified" and "AIDS not classified" and 11.2% - 27.6% of deaths were described in unacceptable vague terms. 27% died from pneumonia and also included septicemia, encephalopathy, cardiac arrest, lymphoma, dementia, blood loss, meningitis and seizures. 50% of people with AIDS cannot tolerate AZT and have to be taken off the drug but as soon as JAMA printed an article, Burroughs Wellcome rushed to the media to claim that AZT had extended the lives of patients in the "IND study". It said;

"Nearly 5000 patients who took the AIDS - fighting drug once known as AZT, survived at a much greater rate than those without it, say researchers for the maker". The study demonstrated only how farcical the peer-reviewing standards were of even leading medical journals.

AZT went from only being used for end of life cancer patients or those with PCP, to anyone with HIV regardless of symptoms. The rationale for prescribing AZT was that people with AIDS were suffering from a fatal disease, only had a few months to live and that AZT might extend life for a few more months. With the well orchestrated propaganda from the NIAID, AIDS groups, clinical researchers and Burroughs Wellcome, physicians were urged to prescribe AZT for perfectly healthy people! They were targeting individuals of anyone testing positive for HIV. This is genocide. The fraudulent trials were the basis of government approval of AZT.

Most drugs take around 10 years for the FDA approval process. This includes initial safety tests in animals and humans, clinical trials for safety and efficacy and extensive review and analysis of the data. AZT was rushed through faster than any other drug at that time, less than 2 years, on the basis of research that was inadequate and fraudulent. The covid vaccine beats AZT at just 9 months for approval.......of which, we can now see the devastation caused.

There was no official, ongoing surveillance of AZT's side effects. We know through the people with AIDS grapevine that many of them experienced muscular atrophy which stops when AZT is discontinued. Physicians observed; "All patients had an insidious onset of myalgias, muscle tenderness, weakness and severe muscle atrophy". Physical examinations revealed varying degrees of muscle weakness and grossly apparent atrophy. Weight loss due to muscle loss was uniformly noted. In one patient, the loss was a striking 40 pounds.

Other well known effects of AZT include damage to the kidneys, liver and nerves and causes cancer in animals. The study involved 960 male and female rats and mice, treated for 19-22 months, equivalent to most of their normal life span. High, middle and low doses of AZT were given to 720 rodents while the other 240 were controls and received nothing. Cancer occurred only among the female rodents of the AZT group, no tumours were found in the control group.

Burroughs Wellcome rushed to cover this up and released a statement;

"Results from rodent carcinogenicity studies are of limited predictive value for humans".

Unbelievable! So why on earth do we use them??? If they are so meaningless why are they a standard part of toxicity screening of new drugs? Such incredible statements being made by all involved, as if people really buy this nonsense. Unfortunately though, many do, although they are not aware of any of this information, it's not in public view for obvious reasons. Nevertheless, they did actually say this.

Jerome Horwitz was the inventor or AZT. He admitted to numerous people over the years that the reason AZT was shelved in the 1960's was because of its extreme toxicity as well as ineffectiveness. Not only did AZT not cure cancer, it caused it. AZT was rejected as a cancer drug without ever testing on humans.

Jerome Horwitz

There are zero benefits to AZT, there is no credible scientific evidence, only a dozen worthless studies have been rattled off with the comment that the evidence is "overwhelming". HIV positive people, symptoms or not, wouldn't normally die from AIDS. They do so only because of the treatment.

Fauci announced the NIAID would be conducting trials of AZT on pregnant women infected with HIV! A drug that interferes with growth can only lead to deformities in the womb (like thalidomide). The NIH itself financed the study with an obviously massive conflict of interest and they recruited mums who had been injecting heroin. Fauci believed that heroin addiction posed less of a threat to children than HIV! AZT is mutagenic, just like thalidimide (since which, no mutagenic drug was ever to be given to pregnant women again). There were 2 birth defects in a study of 124 mothers which oddly wasn't attributed to AZT but "something else", 8 spontaneous abortions and 8 serious birth defects.

An american couple who had adopted a 2-month old baby from Romania took her for a check up with a clinic in their home of Minneapolis which included a HIV test which was confirmed as positive. Lindsay's birth mother was HIV negative. It must have come from the unnecessary blood transfusion that she received within Romania's backward medical system.

She was a picture of health. The parents were obviously terrified of HIV thanks to the fear campaign rammed down everyone's throats for a decade. The doctor examined Lindsay who had no symptoms whatsoever but even so, she was prescribed "Septra" to be taken 3 times weekly for "potential AIDS pneumonia".

According to the "Physicians Desk Reference 1992" Septra caused nausea, vomiting, anorexia, bone marrow depression, rash, fever and leukopenia among the side effects. She took it for 9 months (even the manufacturer Burroughs Wellcome stated it shouldn't be taken for longer than 2 weeks!). Lindsay's weekly check up showed that she was still absolutely fine, no symptoms but the doctor wanted to slow the presumed inevitable AIDS so prescribed AZT at 120mg each day, in addition to the Septra. The side effects, some of which were noted, were hugely understated.

AZT kills dividing cells anywhere in the body causing ulcerations and hemorrhaging, damage to hair folicles and skin, kills the energy cells of the brain (mitochondria - which is why dementia is listed as an AZT side effect) causes wasting muscle disease and complete destruction of the immune system. Children are obviously more affected than adults because they are still growing and developing.

Lindsay's appetite declined and she was getting sicker. She stopped growing at the normal rate but the doctor put it down to HIV rather than the effects of the drugs. A new doctor took Lindsay off Septra which did improve her condition although decided to increase AZT thinking it was helping! A few weeks later the doctor was pressuring the parents to put Lindsay on DDI which is another DNA chain terminator like AZT to help with the apparent HIV infection because Lindsay's T-cells were dropping (because of the AZT!) The parents were growing suspicious by now and declined DDI as well as reconsidering giving their daughter AZT.

Shortly after this, Lindsay's parents woke up to tormented screams. She was crying and clutching her legs in agony (muscle pain from AZT) which happened night after night. They made the connection after growing concerns and accidentally came across an article from Peter Duesberg. They spoke with him on the telephone and finally stopped AZT.

Lindsay became a "new child" almost overnight. She was sleeping much better and for longer periods of time, eating properly again, could drink milk without vomiting and could sit still, something she had not been able to do since being on the drugs. Lindsay saw a nutritionist for 2 months and was back at her development level and thriving.

They were threatened and "schooled" by their doctor who learned of their decision to stop AZT who said;

"As we have discussed repeatedly, AIDS is a fatal disease. To take Lindsey off Retrovir (Brand name for AZT) now will, I am afraid, hasten her decline and death. As parents, you are responsible for your child's health and life. Running away from qualified medical care will not help you, and it will certainly jeopardize Lindsey's life. You must take Lindsey to a qualified M.D. immediately." She followed this up with an angry call to the parents and said; "that there are foster homes to provide care for children who were in Lindsey's predicament!". This is absolutely disgusting and still happens today, so much for "trusting your doctor!"

Unfortunately the same can't be said of another family who gave (on the recommendation of their physician) their healthy asymptomatic HIV positive little girl AZT. After suffering the worst side effects, she died a painful death a few days before she turned six years old. This was down to Tony Fauci for his recommendation to physicians in prescribing KNOWN toxic drugs to completely healthy babies, or to ANYONE for that matter. Sickening.

DDI (DNA chain terminator like AZT) causes fatal damage to the pancreas and destroys nerves throughout the body, on top of the same side effects as AZT. On an experimental basis, a number of physicians began giving DDI to thousands of AIDS patients who couldn't tolerate AZT and hundreds of deaths occurred.

David Kessler was head of the FDA and pushed them to approve AZT despite concerns. After it was approved, floods of studies on AIDS patients came forth with frightening toxicity. The Claude Bernard Hospital ran some studies on hundreds of AIDS patients who all used high doses of AZT for an average of 7 months. One third experienced worsening AIDS conditions and a slightly higher % developed new AIDS diseases. By 9 months 1 in 5 patients had died. This is a classic case of Iatrogenicity (illness caused by medical treatment) and it happens on an incredible scale, much more than the majority of people realise or want to even consider.

A dutch study that lasted 12 months showed that 91 patients needed blood transfusions and almost three quarters of them died. Some doctors stopped AZT and their patients returned to some level of health or at least ceased suffering from wasting muscle disease.

All of this still didn't dissuade officials for AIDS, they were too heavily invested. Having won approval, Burroughs Wellcome and the NIH moved to have AZT recommended as a preventative for HIV positive people without symptoms. Fauci headed this study and Burroughs Wellcome financed it, it was virtually guaranteed to succeed, regardless of its outcome.

They enrolled 1300 HIV positive healthy persons from AIDS risk groups, none of whom had AIDS diseases and split them into three groups, low dose AZT, high dose AZT and a placebo. More cancers like Kaposi Sarcoma appeared in the placebo, hinting that more users of poppers and recreational drugs ended up there, biasing the results in favour of AZT. The drop out patients came from the AZT groups removing some of the sickest patients. Blood tests showed that 9% of the placebo group had AZT while 20% of the AZT group had no traces of using the drug. The high dose AZT came out the worse (to be expected) with dozens of deathly ill patients. By calling diseases in the placebo group "AIDS" and avoiding that diagnosis for the AZT groups, came the recommendation for using the drug on healthy HIV positive people.

Another study showed twice as much dementia in AZT treated homosexuals than in their untreated counterparts. A study for AZT prophylaxis (treatment given to prevent disease) found that HIV positive hemophiliacs had a 2.4 times higher mortality and 4.5 times higher AIDS risk than untreated HIV positive hemophiliacs.

In 1990 the FDA recommended halving the dose of AZT. This was because half the patients couldn't tolerate the dose at 1200mg. However, even those on lower doses sometimes had to quit using because of the severe side effects, but lowering the dose meant more people could take it, even those without symptoms, exposing themselves to the toxicity of AZT. The market expanded to outside of risk groups.

A conference headed by the NIAID in 1990 on prescribing AZT to HIV positive patients with low T-cells encouraged physicians to get the HIV antibody test. The conclusions of the conference were already decided in advance, the panel was stacked, with no critics but many advocates of AZT.

There were many speakers and presentations at this conference and the likes of Tony Fauci purposely misled the audience and made baseless statements in favour of HIV. Dr Peter Duesberg spoke, he argued that;

HIV didn't have the physical properties to cause disease as the HIV "killing cells" hypothesis was incorrect. It couldn't be true because retroviruses don't kill cells, they make them grow faster.

The HIV hypothesis was the basis for the "AIDS test" which was only a test for antibodies which for 200 years have been good news and now they were being interpreted as a prognosis for death. Positive results on the antibody test resulted in suicides and broken marriages.

The "AIDS virus" hypothesis is based only on correlation between HIV antibodies and AIDS, which are only found in about half of AIDS patients, failing the first Koch postulate. HIV is latent and inactive, even in patients dying from AIDS. In a control group of 14,000 hemophiliacs in the USA that were HIV positive, only 2% of them developed symptoms of AIDS.

Anthony Fauci was the most publicly prominent member of the AIDS establishment, often quoted in the press and featuring on TV shows. He used vague epidemiological studies and unpublished lab data. He understood none of Duesberg's arguments, a Public Relations man, nothing more.

William Haseltine and Max Essex were the 2 most prominent AIDS researchers who had millions in stocks in companies that they founded, that developed and sold AIDS kits that tested for HIV.

HIV didn't fit the gold standard of Koch Postulates, not even the first one, so they recommended "changing" this well established gold standard using epidemiological correlations instead. Epidemiology isn't sufficient to prove that HIV is the cause of AIDS. Correlation is not the same as causation.

It's the drugs themselves and not the sharing of needles that cause the damage. Many years previous to HIV, IV drug users had died from pneumonia and they always will. It's amazing that the Public Health Service has given the message "drugs are safe but needles are dangerous" right in the middle of a "War on Drugs".

Despite everything in this post and more, where are we with HIV-AIDS today? Forty years into this fiasco and the AIDS establishment has not saved a single life. Just to clarify, although they do admit that HIV may not be responsible in causing AIDS on it's own these days (because they've had no choice) they STILL tow the party line and most people believe it. HIV is a harmless retrovirus, is NOT sexually transmitted and it's not the cause of AIDS, it's simply a marker for drug consumption, illicit or prescribed. This is what is presented when you google HIV;

"A viral infection that attacks the immune system and causes AIDS. HIV is primarily a sexually transmitted disease (STD), transmitted by heterosexual and homosexual practices: anal, vaginal, and oral sex". - This is COMPLETELY false. It goes on to say;

"Can be dangerous or life threatening if untreated" - again, this is a LIE and causes huge psychological damage in an unknowing HIV positive patient. NO! there are millions of cases of HIV without AIDS! It's the awful so called prophylactic AZT that will CAUSE disease and kill the patient.

"Urgent medical attention is usually recommended by healthcare providers". Yep, so they can "treat" you with poisonous chemotherapeutic chemicals for absolutely NO reason, other than to make the manufacturer and others within the field, rich.

"Treatments can help manage the condition, no known cure". - Despicable lies once again as the treatments are DNA chain terminators that kill ALL cells and cause horrific side effects and death. The cure to AIDS is to stop taking recreational drugs (although many prescription meds are just as toxic, even more so in many cases) Change the lifestyle you are living and eat a healthier, more nutritional diet. These are the things that will keep you healthy REGARDLESS of HIV status.

Back last year in 2021 there was a huge hype about HIV being spliced in the covid-19 vaccines. This immediately caught my attention as I knew that HIV was not harmful and that it didn't cause AIDS, so what game were they playing?

The people in charge of this blatant manipulation are very aware that the majority of the population are absolutely terrified of HIV because they'd spent almost half a century ensuring it. Good move. Here is my opinion on why they did this, it's not solid proof, only an opinion.

I'm a medical researcher, predominantly vaccines. I'm very well aware of how they are supposed to work, as well as how much they don't work, at all, ever, never have and never will. Vaccines are based upon the germ theory, which is incorrect. I am also aware that no so called "viruses" exist outside the body. They have a purpose, they are NEEDED, without them the body would have no recourse to detoxify and we would die. For more information on viruses please look at my other blogs and videos, I don't have time to explain it here. There are no "viruses" within vaccines that help protect you from the "real thing" when administered through the needle, it's simply diseased and decaying tissue grown on monkey kidneys and aborted fetal tissue in a petri dish in laboratory settings, with around 60 other toxic chemicals and contaminants, in EACH phial.

So based on this, HIV being "spliced" into the vaccine means nothing at all, since HIV has never been isolated or shown to cause disease. EVER. So why the push? why did they mention it and why is it being blown up EVERYWHERE right now. Could be for a few reasons.

As we know, many people have succumbed to medical tyranny and accepted the covid vaccine, mostly through coercion. Many have suffered and died as a direct result, my own father included. He died on the 23rd October 2021 from a heart attack at age 66. According to the yellow card system here in the UK there are 1,458,428 recorded side effects and 2017 deaths (as of 10th Feb 2022). Just for a little context, only between 1-10% of people ever record, more towards the 1% rather than the 10%. As a vaccine researcher, I can categorically state that this vaccine has killed more people within the first year of it's roll out than ALL other vaccine deaths combined, for the past 15 years.

It's not a secret that these injuries and deaths exist, we can all SEE it, whether we want to admit it or not. So, those side effects can now be blamed on HIV, they are just taking you into another fear based scenario because covid is dying down. I'm wondering at this point whether covid was just a test run for the real deal. This is how they'll do it....

They planted the seed a year ago by releasing articles of HIV being inside the vaccine. Even many of those who are aware of this scamdemic still don't realise the magnitude of the lie or how far back it goes. They still believe that HIV is also a "virus" that can cause AIDS, therefore it was a very good move, pulling both mainstream and "conspiracists" at the same time. Genius.

The only reason you are seeing HIV everywhere right now is because they want you to go and get tested, with a test proven to be absolutely useless. HIV is harmless, a positive test means nothing. Unless you understand the truth about this, you will be terrified and coerced into taking whatever "treatment" offered to you if you test positive, which will be a DNA chain terminator like AZT. They still use it today, it's now called Zidouvine. There are many types of the same drug with different names, just as all anti-depressants are the same, in that they produce the same psycho-active effects as well as physical side effects. THIS is the very reason that people are sick! Not just these drugs, but those for depression and anxiety too. The issue with big pharmaceuticals is that it's a business, it's not there to "cure" you from a single thing, or they'd be out of business. They are a multi-trillion dollar empire built from sick people.

If people go along with this and listen to the "professionals" and of course the various "famous people" pushing the "get tested" nonsense, the consequences will be disastrous just as they were in the 80's and 90's, which was the reason for this blog. No doubt many of you see the obvious parallels between HIV and SARSCOV2, how each of them came to be. All of this devastation, all across the world based on a huge falsity. Neither of these so called "viruses" have ever been isolated, characterised and shown to cause disease.

They even used the very same front man, their "public relations" puppet Dr Tony Fauci whom, along with his affiliates, used the VERY SAME PLAYBOOK to orchestrate another FAKE epidemic and benefited from it, again, at the expense of many many lives, this is criminal.

This is WWIII, this time not fought with bombs and guns. They used an "invisible enemy", something no-one can see and created a fake "epidemic" as they have many times before. Off the back of the fear campaigns they continually use to create mass panic, many people have died and will continue to do so. Vaccine death is not the only culprit over these last 2 years. There have been countless deaths that occurred through the use of "end of life" drugs such as midazolam and diamorphine drivers, which were labelled as "covid19" deaths. There were countless deaths from lack of treatment for deathly ill patients and suicides have trebled. Mental health disease has hit an all time high and is increasing significantly.

R.I.P to the casualties of this evil fabrication. The truth will come out, whatever it takes and we will get justice for all of those sacrificed. Mark my words.

The sources used for this blog can be found in my recommended reading section, along with all the references and studies. Thank you to Peter Duesberg and John Lauritson especially, who inspired me to write this blog based upon their earlier findings. You can also find lots of information on vaccines and "viruses" within the video and news sections of my website.

We've seen it a million times before, we need to truly understand what has been going on so we can put a stop to this insanity. Knowledge is power.