Nexus - 0605 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

The Yin & Yang of HIV The Yin Yang HIV When put to the test, conventional HIV/AIDS theory is at odds with the clinical evidence. Is "purified HIV" no more than a tangle of cellular debris? Part 2 of 3 The real purpose of scientific method is to make sure Nature hasn't misled you into thinking something you don't actually know... One logical slip and an entire scientific edifice comes tumbling down. One false deduction about the machine and you can get hung up indefinitely. — Robert Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance SOME SCIENTIFIC PROBLEMS WITH THE HIV THEORY - The theory vs the definition he central premise of the HIV theory of AIDS is that there exists a unique retro- virus, transmissible via blood and sexual secretions, which induces specific anti- bodies and kills T4 cells whose relative absence then causes the appearance of approximately 30 diseases which constitute the clinical syndrome. The theory, however, is rendered completely contradictory by the official AIDS definition used clinically. In Australia, an individual is diagnosed as having AIDS if he or she fulfills the criteria set out in the latest (1993) revision of the US "CDC surveillance case definition for AIDS". (Other definitions in use around the world make scientific comparisons almost impossible. In Africa, AIDS is diagnosed on symptoms and without blood tests.'*) Since from 1985 the Centers for Disease Control "accepts" HIV as the cause of AIDS, it should not be possible to diagnose AIDS by any means inconsistent with the HIV theory. However, even a cursory reading of the 1993 definition reveals AIDS can be diagnosed— with the imprimatur of the CDC—with Kaposi's sarcoma (which even Gallo™ accepts is not caused by HIV), in the absence of immune deficiency, "without laboratory evidence of HIV infection" and, extraordinarily, "in the presence of negative results for HIV infec - tion" (italics ours). Sexual transmission HIV/AIDS is claimed to be bidirectionally sexually transmitted. Data to support this claim are based not upon microbial isolation and contact tracing, as is the orthodox prac- tice for proving diseases are infectious and sexually transmitted, but on mostly retrospec- tive studies of highly selected groups of individuals—including homosexual and bisexual men, heterosexual men and women including prostitutes—for antibodies in blood which react with certain proteins deemed "HIV-specific". Included in these studies are estima- tions of risk factors for the specific sexual practices of penile-insertive, vaginal, anal- receptive and oral-receptive intercourse. + Homosexual men In 1984, Gallo and his colleagues showed that "Of eight different sexual acts, a positive HIV antibody test correlated only with receptive anal intercourse".'"” They also found that the more often a homosexual man had insertive anal intercourse, the less likely he was to become HIV-positive. This is incompatible with an infectious cause. In 1986, Gallo and his colleagues reported they "found no evidence that other forms of sexual activity con- tribute to the risk" of HIV seroconversion in homosexual men.'" In an extensive review of 25 studies of homosexual men reported in 1994 by Caceres and van Griensven, the authors concluded that "no or no consistent risk of the acquisition of HIV-1 infection has been reported regarding insertive intercourse".'"* In the West, the largest and most judiciously conducted prospective epidemiological © 1999 by Valendar F. Turner Department of Emergency Medicine Royal Perth Hospital Perth, Western Australia and Andrew Mcintyre Freelance Journalist Melbourne, Victoria, Australia and Andrew Mcintyre Freelance Journalist Melbourne, Victoria, Australia NEXUS - 43 AUGUST - SEPTEMBER 1999