AIDS: A contrived ‘blood and sex plague’

It has been a couple of years since I read the book Inventing the AIDS Virus, by Peter H. Duesberg. At 704 pages including footnotes, it was a challenge. In the front, a former owner of the book wrote to a friend he had given it to “A must read! If Duesberg is correct, the powers that be have even more control than we could have ever suspected.” Indeed.

I meant to write about this subject long ago, but kept putting it off for a number of reasons:

  • I am not a scientist, a molecular biologist, a virologist. This stuff is complicated, and I am in over my head. That does not mean I cannot grasp any of these fields or form conclusions based on the solid reasoning of others.  But it does mean that I can be easily misled by someone who intends to mislead me. So the writing is difficult, understanding even more so. I can and must try to stick to the basics, and allow readers to explore on their own rather than relying on me to bring ‘the truth’ to their platters. If any of what follows troubles you, if you think me wrong, then by all means get going. There is a lot of material to cover. (I will use the term “virus” freely throughout this piece, but not “retrovirus,” which will always be used with great skepticism, even scare quotes. )

  • I am not comfortable with Peter Duesberg. Is he controlled opposition? Unlike other dissenters in the AIDS field, he is internationally known. He was allowed to publish a book. He also insists, unlike other dissenters, that the HIV (retro)virus is real (though he maintains it is harmless). He thereby aligns himself with those who have heavily promoted HIV as the cause of AIDS. I suspect him to be CO, but cannot do anymore than what we all do when confronted with such people – take what is good, and ignore the rest. Readers should maintain high and healthy skepticism when I quote him.
  • I was not comfortable with the idea that healthy people were dying from administration of antiretroviral drugs like AZT, ddl and ddC, so-called DNA “chain terminators.” These drugs are themselves destructive of immune systems and even deadly. People do not easily or readily harm one another. Such treatment is barbaric. Surely doctors see what is before their eyes, at least some must see this, right? (Of course, if doctors have rebelled, we would never hear of these doctors, right?)

To overcome these problems, I am going to boldly go, to assert with evidence and take a chance on being wrong that AIDS is a fake “pandemic.” The case of Magic Johnson (covered later) has instructive power, as does that of Freddie Mercury, whose death was, in my view, faked. I have not looked into Rock Hudson or Arthur Ashe, but have similar suspicions. In order to ‘sell’ this disease, they needed high-profile people to die from it. AIDS, I will assert, is a real syndrome, but not contagious, not caused by HIV, and can even be cured on occasion by change of lifestyle.

There. I said it. AIDS is fake. If only it were that simple, I could stop here.

Peter Heinz Herrmann Duesberg

pdIf Duesberg is controlled opposition (CO), to what end? Take a person I know to be CO, Bernie Sanders. What does he do? He gathers up those opposed to controllers and leads them … nowhere. CO’s bottle up opposition forces, making sure it amounts to nothing. Duesberg has had no impact on any public official, medical journal, or medical institution. He has been run over by a stampede.

Still, in writing this, I will quote him freely as I think the information he offers us is comprehensible and real, even if only used to control us. But remember, he wrote a long book on the subject, and the book was published, meaning by definition that it was not censored. We know about it. (The publisher is Regnery of Washington, DC, which is aligned with the reactionary right wing, calling itself “conservative.” It centers on works by people like Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin. I find this a strange alliance.)

My recent foray into the PSA mess convinced me that doctors really do harm patients, even if unwittingly, blinded by acquisition of great wealth. Hundreds of thousands of men have had unnecessary, even debilitating surgery at the hands of highly trained urologists. If so with PSA, why not with AIDS? Administration of deadly drugs to “cure” something that is not caused by a virus (or retrovirus), doing great harm to the patients, is not unheard of, not even unusual. Think back to the great influenza epidemic of 1918, and the administration of the wonder-drug of the time, aspirin. Same song, different verse …

Pandemic

Wikipedia says that AIDS is a “pandemic.” This is defined as an epidemic that has spread over continents. An epidemic is a disease that has spread to a large number of people in a short period of time, usually a few weeks. Epidemics usually follow bell-curve-type patterns, as with EBOLA, below.

ebola

This is typical of rapid spread and then self-containment of a virus by a human population. Ebola, in fact, turned out to be caused by use of dirty needles in one hospital, and that hospital fixed its problems before the World Health Organization (WHO) and their stampede of people in white lab coats had a chance to do anything about it. It did result in a movie, Outbreak, which if I remember correctly was used to morally justify bombing a village, wiping it off the map, to contain an Ebola outbreak.

aids

AIDS has behaved nothing like an epidemic of that nature. It has behaved more like an illness brought about by an agent, as with tobacco use, emphysema and lung cancer. It grew slowly, and often grew only because the diseases (listed below) associated with AIDS expanded. AIDS, says Duesberg, is a lifestyle disease, and not caused by a virus. Therefore, use of the term “pandemic” is scare talk.


Below is the current list of diseases, taken from the Center for Disease Control Website (this replaces previous information from the Veterans Department. There are 28:

CDC AIDS-defining conditions

Candidiasis of bronchi, trachea, or lungsCandidiasis of oesophagus, may be diagnosed presumptively
Cervical cancer, invasive, in those aged 13 or older
Coccidioidomycosis, disseminated or extrapulmonary
Cryptococcosis, extrapulmonary
Cryptosporidiosis, chronic intestinal for more than 1 month
Cytomegalovirus disease, other than liver, spleen, or nodes, onset after one month of life
Cytomegalovirus retinitis (with loss of vision), may be diagnosed presumptively
Encephalopathy, HIV related
Herpes simplex: chronic ulcers for more than 1 month or bronchitis, pneumonitis, or oesophagitis with onset after 1 month of life
Histoplasmosis, disseminated or extrapulmonary
Isosporiasis, chronic intestinal for more than 1 month
Kaposi’s sarcoma, may be diagnosed presumptively
Lymphoma, Burkitt (or equivalent term)
Lymphoma, immunoblastic (or equivalent term)
Lymphoma, primary, of brain
Mycobacterium avium complex or Mycobacterium kansasii, disseminated or extrapulmonary, may be diagnosed presumptively
Mycobacterium tuberculosis of any site (pulmonary, disseminated, or extrapulmonary) in those aged 13 years or older, may be diagnosed presumptively
Mycobacterium, other species or unidentified species, disseminated or extrapulmonary, may be diagnosed presumptively
Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, may be diagnosed presumptively
Pneumonia, recurrent, only in those aged 13 years or older; may be diagnosed presumptively
Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy
Salmonella septicemia, recurrent
Toxoplasmosis of brain, onset after 1 month of life, may be diagnosed presumptively
Wasting syndrome attributed to HIV

AIDS-defining condition only in persons under 13 years of age:
Bacterial infections, multiple or recurrent
Lymphoid interstitial pneumonia or pulmonary lymphoid hyperplasia complex, may be diagnosed presumptively


So the supposed “pandemic” is nothing more than a list of diseases that already existed. When a patient is found to be “HIV positive”, the associated disease is then officially labeled “AIDS.” During the 1980s the diseases associated with AIDS were increased, and as a result, the prevalence of AIDS increased, giving rise to the illusion that AIDS was spreading. So while the blue line on the graph above shows AIDS-related deaths, it is very probable that those deaths would have occurred and been labeled something else without the presence of HIV, which in my view has never caused even one death.What do they label a death from cervical cancer without presence of HIV? A death from cervical cancer.

In sharp contrast to the bell-shaped curve of a conventional new infectious epidemic, like the flu epidemic shown in Figure 1 [page 192], the AIDS epidemic increased steadily for fifteen years (figure 2A) [page 194]. American AIDS gradually spread from a few dozen cases annually in 1981 to more than eighty thousand cases in 1994. It did not explode, as the HIV orthodoxy predicted; neither did it decline, as would be expected from antiviral immunity. Instead of resembling an infectious disease, the time course of the AIDS epidemic resembles the slow progressing epidemics of lung cancer and emphysema in industrialized nations, building up over the years in step with tobacco consumption. These noninfectious epidemics neither rose exponentially nor affected all groups of the population or both sexes equally, nor did they disappear as a result of antiviral immunity or natural resistance

In fact, AIDS grew in parallel with drug abuse in the gay community, including widespread use of antibiotics to combat the multitude of infections that went along with the life style. It more resembled the spread of lung cancer and emphysema, which can be tied to tobacco use, and which have declined as tobacco use has declined. Thus, says Duesberg,

This AIDS does not meet the classical epidemiological criteria of an infectious disease. The failure of AIDS to meet these criteria destroys not only all hopes of the HIV orthodoxy ever to prove that HIV causes AIDS, but also any other viral or bacterial theories of AIDS.

If it were only that simple. But AIDS was a project, still is, and is part of an agenda, which I will try to understand as we work our way through all of the behaviors of the medical community from 1981 forward.

What is a retrovirus?

I hope when I am done with this section, I will no longer be confused. We are told that RNA comes before DNA, and that the process is one-way only, and cannot be reversed.

“After infecting a cell, a retrovirus uses an enzyme called reverse transcriptase to convert its RNA into DNA. The retrovirus then integrates its viral DNA into the DNA of the host cell, which allows the retrovirus to replicate. HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, is a retrovirus.” (AIDSinfo.com)

Phew! Here it gets murky, as others claim that reverse transcriptase is common and ordinary, part of our existence. Those who advance “retrovirus” theory argue that it is an accident. But if they are wrong, if it is common, then there is no such thing as a retrovirus. It would merely be a part of the cell apart from the cell nucleus. In fact, one source I read (quoted below) said that “retroviruses” actually function as repair centers for damages to cells when they occur. This would then make HIV part of us, existing in all of us, and doing no harm. It is part of our makeup, like our hair follicles and fingerprints.

In fact, I read that when laboratories do HIV antibody tests, they dilute the sample being tested to 1/400 of its original strength. Otherwise, we would all test as “HIV-positive.” They want only those who test in high numbers, which is odd. With other diseases having high numbers of antibodies indicates a healthy immune system hard at work, successfully fighting a disease. With AIDS it is quite the opposite. I do not comprehend.

I am going to stop here as I am sensing murkiness between my ears, but suffice it to say that while there is good evidence for the existence of viruses and viral infection, for retorviruses, not so much.

The arrival of HIV

Duesberg himself was involved in the failed search for a virus that caused cancer, a Nixon-era legacy that left many “virologists” without a source of government grants. In 1980 Michael Gottlieb of UCLA, in Duesberg’s words, “began scouring the hospital for patients with immune deficiency diseases.” Why? It appears he had a new way of testing “T-cell” counts. He was looking for people to use it on. He came across one who suffered from a yeast infection in his throat that could not be cured. The microbe that caused the condition, Pneumocystis carinii, exists in all of us but is rarely harmful, usually striking people undergoing chemotherapy and thus having weak immune systems. This patient, in his early thirties, was not undergoing chemo. Gottlieb wanted to try out this new technology for counting T-cells, part of our white blood cells. This patient had hardly any white blood cells at all, which he found shocking.

He eventually found three similar cases, all suffering yeast infection and Pneumocystis pneumonia, all having low T-cell counts. Excited, he searched for more patients, thinking he had perhaps found a new syndrome, a big deal for medical researchers. Gottlieb hooked up with Wayne Shandera, who added one more case to the list.

All five men were active homosexuals. Shandera brought the Center for Disease Control (CDC) into it, and AIDS was born, but not under that name. It was called KSOI (Kaposi’s sarcoma and Opportunistic Infections), as Kaposi’s sarcoma, a cancer that causes patches of abnormal tissue to grow under the skin and other places, was common among those suffering the syndrome. Quite common among those sufferers was use of “poppers.”

Poppers

poppersSo-named because of the sound they make when the bottles are opened, poppers are vials of nitrite inhalants. The use of poppers, along with other recreational drugs (and antibiotics to contain rampant infections) skyrocketed in the late 1970s in the gay communities of San Francisco and LA and New York. Poppers were used to facilitate anal intercourse, as well as to maintain erections and prolong orgasms. Duesberg believes poppers to be a major cause behind the outbreak of AIDS in the California bath houses of the era.

Poppers were marketed as room deodorizers, a ruse. The coincidence of Kaposa’s sarcoma and popper use was heavily correlated, though currently denied by the medical establishment. (By the way, I am not in judgmental mode when writing of these sexual gay activities. These are merely the facts we must deal with.)

Enter Dr. Donald Francis, part of “EIS,” or the Epidemic Intelligence Service, a mole-like organization that had planted agents throughout the country sniffing out disease outbreaks. Francis was involved in the Ebola outbreak, though it was self-contained before he could do anything about it. He was also involved in searching the Feline Leukemia Virus, thought to be caused by a retrovirus, making him a retrovirus hunter. KSOI was right up his alley.

Francis thought that KSOI might be feline leukemia in humans, as retroviruses were generally known to infect white blood cells. He also thought that said retrovirus had a long period of incubation, and saw that KSOI had sprung up in three cities on both coasts unnoticed. Thus, Francis was convinced that KSOI was caused by a retrovirus. If we search hard enough for something, especially if our careers depend on it, we will find something.

At this point Robert Gallo headed a “huge and well-funded” retrovirus lab at the NCI, or National Cancer Institute. He had already discovered “HTLV-1”, which he believed caused T-cell leukemia in humans. He and another staffer, Max Essex, asserted in 1983 that KSOI, which would be renamed AIDS, was caused by HTLV-1. They renamed it, however, as “lymphotropic,” meaning a retrovirus that inhabits, but does not cause cancer or necessarily kill T-cells. All of this preceded discovery of “HIV.” (“Lymphotropic” then seems to indicate that “retroviruses” are not necessarily harmful. This might explain while most of us carry them in many forms, if indeed “retrovirus” is even a correct term for them.)

Gallo versus Montagnier

gallo
Gallo
montagnier
Montagnier

Many years ago I was privileged to listen to a brief and funny talk by a man I can only remember by the name “Fr. Stanley.” He was a teacher at my older  brother’s school. His talk was about counting from one to ten, philosophically speaking.  What he was doing, I now realize, is something that very smart people do easily, make complicated subjects understandable by use of plain language. Philosophy is for others, not for me, but I remember the first part of the talk, the problem of getting from zero to one without being able to prove the existence of “one.” How to do it? This, he said, was the essence of Sartre’s existentialism – you affirm the number one. Affirm it, dammit!

Robert Gallo will feature heavily in the AIDS crisis. Luc Montagnier, a French retrovirologist, thought he had isolated the AIDS virus, not yet given that name. Gallo offered support, but in the end claimed to have discovered one himself that was the cause of AIDS. This was announced in a huge splash even before any scientific papers were published.  However, Montagnier had sent to Gallo samples of the retrovirus he had isolated from a patient. Gallo claimed to have then discovered a different retrovirus, but one that was identical to Montagnier’s, whose sample Gallo claimed to have lost. Thus is Gallo said to have “stolen” discovery of HIV from Montagnier.

Gallo and Montagnier would famously “break ranks” in 1990, when the latter declared that HIV alone could not cause AIDS, but instead needed a “co-factor.” This too is suspicions, as it again evades the question of what role HIV plays in the disease, and deeper yet, that HIV even exists.

“Misdirection” is the tactic of getting people to ask the wrong question to keep them from discovering truth. The Gallo-Montagnier affair, to me, reads as such. Instead of asking if AIDS was even caused by a retrovirus, or even indeed if a retrovirus even exists or can cause disease, we are asking if one guy stole it from another guy, and if HIV needs a co-factor rather than if it even exists.

It appears that people were asking the wrong questions.

Is AIDS a project?

A retrovirus is only detected when antibodies to viral infections are found, meaning that the immune system has done its work. Further, retroviruses do not kill cells. They only inhabit them, if they exist at all.

All of this was set aside, however, and from the Gallo announcement forward, all AIDS research not involving the renamed HIV ceased, and has been nonexistent to this day. This plays out like a project, as if there were already in place big plans to push AIDS on the world as a new, deadly and contagious disease. Essential to the fraud behind it is a culprit, and Robert Gallo (perhaps with Montagnier’s cooperation) short-circuited the process in place that would have introduced other alternatives to the cause of AIDS, including lifestyles.

What Gallo and Montagnier had done by this charade was to affirm the existence of HIV. They affirmed it, dammit!

At this point I want to refer to an interview with Dr. Stefan Lanka. You may know him as the man who offered a $106,000 reward for anyone who could prove the existence of the measles virus. A doctor took him up on it, provided the evidence, and Stefan denied the value of the evidence and refused to pay. It is still in litigation, as I understand it, so I offer a paragraph or two from this interview not because of Lanka’s work, which may be tarnished, but rather that of Dr. Heinrich Kremer, a German medical doctor and former director of the Federal German Drug Abuser Clinics. Dr. Kremer had “HIV-Positive” patients and “the politicians” wanted him to quarantine them. He refused. From this interview with Lanka:

“He said no, because there’s no infectious entity out there. He knew everybody who went through chronic active hepatitis or had the hepatitis B vaccine would test “HIV-positive.” So he knew that there is no infection in his hospital.

He informed the mass media, who went to his hospital to inform themselves, in great detail. He told them all the evidence. And the very same journalists, in talk shows, in Der Spiegel [one of Germany’s largest and most popular magazines] for example, published just the contrary. So he knew that it was intentional from the very beginning. They played war. They all wanted to have a blood and sex plague, contrary to the evidence which he presented to them. So he knew that AIDS was built up on misconceptions. He was dealing at the top political level. They told him, off the record, that they knew, they didn’t care, it was about how to deal with the drug problem and with the homosexuals.” (My emphasis)

Lanka, Kremer, Duesberg and others, called “HIV/AIDS deniers”, can be search-engined and found making their case in a number of publications. I leave it to the reader to form a critical opinion of the value of their contributions. However, the words above struck a chord with me, as they fired up an existing suspicion, that AIDS originated in the halls of high power, in Langley and London, and that it served a purpose having nothing to do with medicine and everything to do with population management.

Koch’s Postulates

Heinrich Hermann Robert Koch (1843-1910) was a German physician and microbiologist. It was he who identified the agents that caused tuberculosis, cholera, and anthrax. It is because of him that the concept of infectious disease is so well-known. I realize here that I come up against those who do not hold with the “germ theory of disease,” but honestly, in all my reading, I cannot dismiss it even if it is not an all-encompassing explanation of human illnesses.

Koch came up with four “postulates,” or things that must be true for a certain agent to be the cause of a certain disease, be that agent bacteria, toxin, or virus. There are:

    1. The microorganism or other pathogen must be present in all cases of the disease.
    2. The pathogen can be isolated from the diseased host and grown in pure culture.
    3. The pathogen from the pure culture must cause the disease when inoculated into a healthy, susceptible laboratory animal
    4. The pathogen must be re-isolated from the new host and shown to be the same as the originally inoculated pathogen.

Needless to say, HIV has never met the criteria as the causal agent of AIDS. Another modern and over-hyped virus, HPV, said to cause cervical cancer, has also never met Koch’s Postulates, as 1/3 of those who have the cancer do not have the virus, and the virus itself is common in healthy people, existing in half the population. AIDS is similar in this regard, as not everyone who has HIV has AIDS, and not everyone who has AIDS has HIV. It flunks Koch’s Postulates.

But no matter, as Wikipedia tells us that Koch’s Postulates are outdated anyway. They cannot be applied to retroviruses such as HIV, as these require a cell to grow in and cannot exist independent of that. Further, they cannot be applied to asymptomatic carriers, that is, people who carry a pathogen, but do not themselves suffer symptoms. HIV is said to be such a pathogen.

It appears that the rigorous standards for associating a pathogen to a disease have been set aside now, since we freely blame diseases on retroviruses (AIDS) and viruses (ZIKA, HPV) without making the physical connection to the symptoms and the agents supposedly causing them. We are told HIV causes AIDS, but the “how?” of it is not quite clear. Normally, as with a head cold, the body would be crawling with millions upon millions of them. With AIDS, it takes only a few, and most often, HIV does nothing to us. Over a million Americans are HIV-positive and symptom-free. Is it getting murky in here?

Here’s Duesberg again:

“If HIV were actively infecting T-cells or other members of the body’s immune system, cell-free virus particles, known as virions, should easily be found with great ease circulating in the blood. This is the case with all classical viral diseases: In a patient suffering from hepatitis B, one milliliter of blood (about five or ten drops) contains approximately ten million free virus particles. Likewise, flu-like symptoms appear only in the presence of one million rhinovirus particles per milliliter of nasal mucous, and one to one hundred billion particles of rotavirus per gram of feces will accompany diarrhea in the patient. But in most individuals suffering from AIDS, no virus particles can be found anywhere in the body.” (Page 175)

The Magic Johnson Affair

From the Duesberg book, page 340:

mjIn November, 1991, Magic proved to be HIV-positive when he applied for a marriage license. Magic was totally healthy until AIDS specialists Anthony Fauci, from the NIH, David Ho, now director of the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center in New York, and Magic’s personal doctor advised AIDS prophylaxis with AZT. Magic’s health changed radically within a few days. The press wrote in December 1991: “Magic Reeling as Worst Nightmare Comes True – He’s Getting Sicker.” Only after he began taking AZT did Magic’s health begin to decline. He “had lost his appetite and suffered from bouts of nausea and fatigue” and complained, “I feel like vomiting almost every day.”

But then suddenly Magic’s AIDS symptoms disappeared – and so did all further news about his AIDS symptoms and treatment. Had Magic’s virus suddenly become harmless, or was Magic taken off AZT? No paper would mention whether Magic was taken off AZT. Nobody knew, except those who joked, “There is no magic in AZT, and there is no AZT in Magic.” Indeed, it is unlikely that he could have won the Olympics in 1992 on AZT, considering his strong reactions to the toxic drug in 1991. The silence of the AIDS establishment seems to confirm this assumption. Nothing would have been a better advertisement for the troubled AIDS drug than having returned AIDS patient Magic to an Olympic victory. But no such announcement was made. At last, Magic broke the silence himself. After a “motivational” AIDS talk in Tallahassee, Florida, in the spring of 1995, Magic responded to a teacher that “He had been taking AZT for a while, but has stopped.” The media preferred not to mention the news.

The Johnson case brings up another facet of AIDS, the cure. Johnson was given AZT, and there exist other medicines used in treatment of AIDS that are said to kill the retrovirus, including ddl and ddC, otherwise labeled “DNA chain terminators.”  AZT was originally used in the 1960s as a chemotherapy drug when the retroviral theory of cancer was still in vogue, but was shelved as that research proved fruitless. It was resurrected with AIDS, as the medical/science industrial complex claimed AIDS to be caused by a retrovirus. It seemed logical.

AZT gained faster approval by the FDA than any other drug in its history up to that time. Some of the reasoning behind approval was that AIDS itself was considered to be “invariably fatal”, so that a drug that at least gave sufferers a fighting chance of recovery seemed both ethical and even well-intentioned. John Lauritson, in his book Poison by Prescription, documents the sloppy research and clinical trials behind AZT.

The multi–center clinical trials of AZT are perhaps the sloppiest and most poorly controlled trials ever to serve as the basis for an FDA drug license licensing approval. Conclusions of efficacy were based on endpoint (mortality) not initially planned or formally followed in the study after the drug failed to demonstrate efficacy on all the originally intended in points. Because mortality was not intended endpoint, causes of death were never verified. Despite this, and a frightening record of toxicity, the FDA approved AZT in record time, granting a treatment IND in less than five days and a full pharmaceutical licensing in less than six months.”

I find this most troubling of all, as it is here where I am seeing patients who found to carry a retrovirus that possibly doesn’t even exist being treated with a drug that does exactly what the alleged disease does … destroy their immune systems. So in many cases death “caused” by AIDS is in fact death caused by AZT. But all of the horrors of AZT are brushed aside by the medical establishment, and it is routinely prescribed, along with the others.

Here, just incidentally, is Wikipedia’s version of the events leading up to the alleged death of the alleged person Mathew Shepard in 1998:

“Still tied to the fence, Shepard was in a coma eighteen hours after the attack when he was discovered by Aaron Kreifels, a cyclist who initially mistook Shepard for a scarecrow.[20] Reggie Fluty, the first police officer to arrive at the scene, found Shepard alive but covered in blood. The medical gloves issued by the Albany County Sheriff’s Department were faulty, and Fluty’s supply ran out. She decided to use her bare hands to clear an airway in Shepard’s bloody mouth. A day later, she was informed that Shepard was HIV-positive and that she might have been exposed to the virus due to cuts on her hands. After taking an AZT regimen for several months, she tested negative for HIV.[21] Judy Shepard later wrote that she learned of her son’s HIV status while he lay dying in the hospital.[22

It is as if they (often referred to on this blog as “TPTB”) are “all in” on this thing, intent on convincing us by every means available that AIDS is real, is caused by HIV, and cured by AZT. I have never witnessed such an epidemic, even a pandemic, of corruption as this in all my dealings in all of my life. It has invaded every mind, every news reporting source, every hospital and clinic. I once knew a woman, a mere acquaintance of ours, who in allowing men to date her first insisted that they be tested for the presence of HIV. That meant that the fear of AIDS made its way down to the vital center of our existence, individual male/female relations. We stopped trusting one another. That is power.

Here is how Charles Ortleb, publisher of The New York native (a publication aimed at homosexuals) described it,

“Ten percent of every brain in America must be filled with posters, news items, condom warnings, etc., etc. The iconography of ‘AIDS’ is everywhere. Part of the Big Lie that some activists promote over and over an Orwellian way is that ‘AIDS’ is somehow not on the front burner of America. ‘AIDS’ propaganda has become part of the very air that Americans breathe.”

I remember how Ronald Reagan was criticized for never using the word “AIDS” in a speech. That was just another way of promoting the hoax, Reagan’s super-inattention.

Wikipedia on AIDS

The Wikipedia piece on HIV/AIDS is written in a matter-of-fact, no-doubt-exists-anywhere manner, as if the matter settled science. No “denier” other than Duesberg is mentioned, and he only in a footnote for an article he wrote claiming that HIV did not cause AIDS. Even that one lonely footnote (#285) is coupled with another article condemning Duesberg. His attitude, Wikipedia tells us, is “HIV/AIDS denialism.” His beliefs, says Wiki, are contradicted by “…conclusive medical and scientific evidence.” (In case you don’t have your logical fallacy guide handy, that is called argumentum ad verecundiam, or an appeal to authority. Methinks Wikipedia just affirmed, dammit!)

hivThe image to the right is said to be an electron microscope (EM) photo of HIV, reproduced in Wiki. Be wary! The image dates back to 1983, and has been deliberately sexed up, that is, refined and colored, to look like something. But it could easily be nothing. In fact, for all we know, it could be a Hubble photo of deep space.

From Frontiers in Public Health, “Questioning the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis: 30 Years of Dissent” (2014):

“In 2010, Ettiene de Harven – the scientist who “produced the first electron micrograph of a retrovirus (the Friend leukemia virus) …

… All the images of particles supposedly representing HIV and published in scientific as well as in lay publications derive from EM studies of cell cultures. They never show HIV particles coming directly from an AIDS patient” [(), p. 70 – emphasis added].

In other words, this could be a photo of contaminants, of undefined particles, or the Crab Nebula. It does not come from an AIDS sufferer. It serves only one purpose: To inspire confidence.

In fact, the whole of the Wikipedia piece is formed on the notion that there is the scientific truth of the matter, and nothing but the truth. It is meant to SELL SELL SELL the theory of HIV/AIDS, and so allows no dissent in any form.

I printed out the entire piece, as I cannot read for long intervals on a computer screen. It is fifty pages long with hundreds of citations. I regard this as the power of lies in our lives, big lies, written in prestigious places and backed by mountains of false evidence. Further, in place in our society is a system of enforcement wherein the lies must be believed for anyone to have a career in research or medicine. The power on display is shocking and intimidating. 2+2=5.

So, tired as I am of this subject, intimidated as I am by the array of power before me, I conclude with some basic elements of the disease we call AIDS:

What, after all, is AIDS?

The “IDS” in AIDS stands for Immune Deficiency Syndrome. It is a real thing. The “Acquired” that the “A” stands for is not so real. We do indeed acquire diseases, but this “A” is meant to imply that it is contagious and can be “caught” by contact with a person said to be “HIV positive.”  That part is false.

It is said that HIV can stay in our bodies for long periods of time, dormant, before it kills us. That too is not true. A true virus is only dangerous when it reproduces in massive numbers, overruning our defenses. With HIV we are confronted with the notion that it only takes relatively few of them to kill a person. That too is false.

The immune system can be and is suppressed. We know how to do it. Chemotherapy harms, even destroys immune systems. Nitrites are harmful to immune systems. During the heyday of the bathhouse scene in big cities in the late 70s and early 80s, nitrites were everywhere in use, along with other drugs and antibiotics.

Recreational drug use, probably even alcohol, can destroy the immune system. Repeated infections can wear it down, and the use of antibiotics to cure the infections also has the same effect. All of this too was prevalent in the bath house scene.

So it should come as no surprise that Michael Gottlieb discovered immune-deficient patients in Los Angeles in 1981. It should not have been hard to work backwards with his five patients to uncover the causes of the IDS. Instead, it branched out to become AIDS, since, as Dr. Kremer tells us, the people in high power wanted a “blood  and sex plague.” AIDS was picked up and used for that purpose.

It is less discussed these days, but it is still sacred. No one is allowed to critique the science behind it, or that HIV is the cause of AIDS. Billions have been spent in research on HIV, and anyone in on the research who doubts HIV to cause AIDS is out.

Why did they want a “blood and sex plague?” I cannot know, of course, and so can only look at the results of the fake AIDS endemic. People slowed down, perhaps having less easy sex with strangers, using condoms. Perhaps, if married, there was less infidelity. People reproduced less, though other factors come into play there, kids getting married at a later age for one. Women distrusted men, were less willing to fool around. Homosexuals were stigmatized even more than already in that era, in fact, almost given leper status. (This was all prior to the gay lifestyle being glamorized on TV and in movies. Go figure.)

It appears as though AIDS was designed to slow down population growth. That is all I can make of it, other than it is always good for leaders when their populations are scared and in need of protection. Fear is a wonderful governing tool.

AIDS in Africa is a post all by itself, apparently another psyop, as real cases of AIDS on that continent are paltry in relative numbers and the population is growing far more rapidly than in Europe or North America. The so-called epidemic in that country has been used to dump drugs like AZT on the market with exorbitant pricing … is just another scam. Bill Gates features prominently. His primary concern is the booming African population, meaning that AIDS there too would be a population control device.

I believe that populations can and do get out of hand. I don’t see that they self-regulate. I find myself uncomfortably in line with the backers who gave us the fake AIDS scare, but I draw the line at killing people already alive.

But “IDS” (my name for the disease) is real, people have died from it in large numbers and continue to do so. They do not die of Immune Deficiency specifically, but of the list of 28 accompanying diseases listed above. Or more.

AIDS does not exist, HIV probably does not exist, retroviruses might well be nothing, but “IDS” does, and has proven fatal to thousands of mostly gay men and intravenous drug users. As things like poppers disappear, as gay men calm down and lead more sedate lives, as drug use diminishes, so too will this thing we call AIDS.

And now I know why I put this post off for so long. Readers, as always, you are on your own, left to use your own brains, do your own research, and draw your own conclusions. What I have written above is just my opinion.

38 thoughts on “AIDS: A contrived ‘blood and sex plague’

  1. wow, what a large piece that became. I’m still not completely through it. I think they let Duesberg and others publish because the entire western medicine somehow got out of control and they cannot simply switch it of. It is so huge now, millions of jobs depend on it. It contains gigantic industry, factories, etc. Insurance based healthcare even huge parts of law is based on it. You cannot just tell all the involved people to go home and look for something new. The majority of them are not even aware that what they are doing is wrong and harmful. It will simply take more time to slow it down and replace it with something new. And this new medicine is not yet there.

    Like

    1. I suppose I should have worked to shorten it (“addition by subtraction”), or serialized it, but I wanted it out of my hair forever, so just wrote it, rewrote, added, and finally pushed the button. Do with it what you will.

      Like

  2. Here is a link to more info about retro-virus from Liam Scheff’s website
    http://liamscheff.com/2010/05/an-onoff-switch-for-retroviruses-can-it-be-that-simple/
    Liam was a very outspoken journalist that took his life in April 2017 from extreme harm and pain caused by a dental procedure…
    http://liamscheff.com/2017/04/dear-friends-2/
    He investigated and wrote The Incarnation Children’s Center Story (an AID’s story that might have led to his death – IMO)…I will leave that link in the next comment so this comment doesn’t have to go into moderation.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. This is why this post was so very hard to write and why I wanted to be done with it … on a very deep level people are debating retroviruses, but on a very surface level people like Duesberg and others are saying research away! AIDS is not even caused by a virus, or a retrovirus, and the people in the highest political circles know it. AIDS was a project. So debating retroviruses is akin to counting angels on the head of a pin. It is time consuming, creates its own jargon, and in terms of AIDS, is pointless.

    I just got to a point where I had to go with what I had and say “never again.”

    Like

    1. Mark, I absolutely agree that AIDS was a project….thought so very early on….and TPTB are trying to keep it current and it is featured numerous times in TV “medical dramas”….makes me laugh that “they” are trying so hard!

      Like

      1. It is deeply woven into our fabric. This is what is so hard about it, their ability to sell a lie so effectively that it is memory-resident in everyone walking upright. The power is without boundaries. If that, what else? I know about moon landings, Jonestown, Columbine, JFKRFKMLKJFKJr and on and on and on … It can be fun to uncover this stuff. But there is no fun to be had here with AIDS. It is ugly.

        Like

  4. retrovirus is an invention made to explain away the fact, that DNA changes due to external conditions, in stress situations for instance. Stefan Lanka said in his interview the following:”In 1970, when they detected biochemically that there is a reverse flow of genetic material, they didn’t give up the dogma or even try to change it. Instead, they called it an exception to the central dogma of molecular genetics, and explained it by postulating the existence of retroviruses.” As I wrote in the past, the modern idea of a virus started in the 50-s when young arrogant scientists (the children from the during war time impoverished bourgeoisie) first proved, that poison (virus) cannot be the cause of some sicknesses if no poison is involved, they reused the term and claimed that some corrupt part of the genetic code must be the reason for some sicknesses and this they called virus maybe not to offend their older colleagues. I think they will do to the western medicine what they did to religion. In a long ongoing process its importance will be vastly reduced. No sane person today believes in the details described in religious books. At least not in the civilized world. People still pretend to be religious but it is more for a clean conscience and not because they still believe that Jesus was crucified to die for our sins and such nonsense. The same will happen to what today still is believed to be modern medicine.

    Like

    1. Once again I tend to agree … the more I delve into medicine, the more I find it to be not so much a hoax as shared ignorance hidden behind lab coats. A few years back I came home from New Zealand with a pesky intestinal disorder. It went on for weeks so finally I saw a doctor about it, thinking I needed antibiotics, believing that I was carrying a germ I acquired after eating beef carpaccio (it sounded Italian and I was tired of their food over there – I had no idea I was ordering raw beef). I described my symptoms to him, and he told me it sounded like a “staph” infection and I assumed it would have a remedy. He said no, antibiotics would not work on the intestines. Just let it take care of itself. It did, but it was with me two months. My wife feared it might be MRSA.

      But in describing a staph infection, he repeated my symptoms and said this is what that bug does. I thought it was strange, and had the sense that he had no idea what was wrong with me and no idea what to do about it, and that I had just sat through a bullshit session. I still harbored the illusion that doctors were the smartest people around, and so was very confused. Had I just stumbled on a bad one? Every class at every school has a person who finishes last. But no, I had a condition brought on by something that eventually went away that no one understands, that’s all. It happens alot.

      Bet you are going to tell me what I had now.

      Like

    2. By the way I read the Lanka article in full and quoted from it in the AIDS piece, but I shied away from him due to the measles virus matter, as I did not know the outcome and am not convinced that there are no viruses. Retroviruses? It gets too complicated for me, and is far away from my reason for writing the post anyway, that AIDS is a hoax, not a virus, not a retrovirus, but rather a nothing.

      Like

      1. it’s not that complicated Mark. They like to make it complicated but nothing in life can be to complicated for a sane mind to understand. The measles virus is the one mostly researched and documented. Lanka won the trial where the jury had to admit, that the official documents and papers are not scientifically enough to prove its existence. There simply is no scientific proof that there is such thing as virus. No contagion was ever demonstrated. The involved people work with suggestions and tricks. And if one reads carefully between the lines, it’s all there. They are not even really lying. But they will never admit that it is hoax. As they will never admit religions are hoaxes too.

        Like

        1. I would like to understand it all better, but I do not. I cannot just sweep aside the idea of a virus as a “hoax” because something is going on there, and serious and non-hoaxing people are developing theories of disease based on something smaller than bacteria. Yes, HIV is a large hoax, but I and my friends growing up all had measles and chicken pox, and then became immune, and there is a real and painful disease we call shingles, said to be the same virus, we are told. I challenge you to explain this in a manner that is not condescending and dismissive. Please also explain why children (and in turn their parents) come down with head colds and similar bouts of illness at a time when the kids are all warehoused in small rooms, in the fall and winter.

          I see people, supposed experts, brush off all of modern medicine as wrong-headed, instead supplying theories of toxins and the human body fighting them off, which amounts to the same theory if the toxin, like the virus, is not specifically identified. Maybe medical experts and the contrarians are like matter and anti-matter, annhilating one another.

          Our family just went through a battle with an intestinal disorder, say no more, with two grandchildren and their dad succumbing. I was exposed, as was my wife and the kids’ mother, and yet none of us got the disease. It was confined to that household, three got it, one not, and two us us not in that household did not get it. Splain, Lucy. It is not as simple as you say.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. there is no disease. The previous sicknesses you remember from the old times happen because of bad life conditions and they disappeared when life got better. In the past we often used hard coal for heating which was burned in small ovens directly in the rooms where children slept. That caused allergic reactions in children we call measles or chicken pox. After central heating systems replaced the ovens in the bedrooms, after houses got their own tab water, after every house got his own toilet, all this sicknesses disappeared. What today is being diagnosed measles is never the same as in the past. As for cold or flu we all overheat our houses and can hardly adjust ourselves to changing weather conditions when winter comes. Just ask yourself, why do we get flu or cold only when the winter starts and ends. Never or hardly in the middle of winter or summer. Also people who fly from a warm place to a cold place often get sick. It’s the step change in temperature which causes flu or cold, depending on your personal condition and living style. Virus is being told to live and spread in warm blood in living bodies, why does it prefer to infect people when the air outside is cold? My children rarely get cold and never at the same time. We should all get cold or flu within a short period of time if it was infectious, no? The flu virus is being told to change every year. How do they know what kind of vaccine will work before the flu starts to spread and the virus manifests itself? Yet still they recommend to take the shot in time every winter because the virus is new and the last year’s vaccine won’t work this year.

            Like

          2. That has some explanatory power, and I have indeed read the same thing in a book I no longer possess disputing the germ theory in its entirety. But it does not explain everything, and grossly simplifies phenomena. Yes, cold and flu season is in time with the change of seasons, but most of the southern part of our country do not have seasons. What they do have, what we all have, are children in small rooms breathing the same air. That too has explanatory power.

            And anyway, not all disease can be so easily written off as you do (“there is no disease”) – Mononucleosis? Shingles? I am not buying.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Mononucleosis and Shingles are just exotic names for some common symptoms. The first one has the same symptoms as flu, the other one is a allergic skin reaction caused probably by temporary deficiency and stress. It also was common in the past and disappeared when life got better and people forgot the war stress. Labs make their antibody tests so that they diagnose what they want to diagnose. A friend was diagnosed shingles not long ago, but she didn’t have this typical skin rash, just some rush and itching. Nonetheless her doctor prescribed her some magic medicine supposedly stopping viruses from spreading and after some time the rush was gone. It would have gone without it too, probably even faster, but we’ll never know for sure because you never have a second chance to compare it. Nobody else got infected. I was visiting her regularly because she was not allowed to go to work for two weeks and got boring at home. She was so grateful and feared that I could catch it too and I was only laughing at her and could’t convinced her that it is nothing to fear. And the main question is: how did she infect herself if there was nobody else there with shingles? And why only her and not at least some few other people from her circles. At the time you develop this symptoms and the doctor sends the probe to the lab and the lab confirms the virus, the infectious time is already over. So you’ve been infectious for a long time before this yet still nobody else got infected? Oh, they will tell you, the majority will have immunity from their childhood but still, how did she infect herself then? I never had shingles nor was vaccinated against it. So why didn’t I get shingles too? Nor any of my children or anybody else. Read again what Lanka wrote in this interview about how the antibody test is being done. “the antibodies that are detected in the test are present in everybody. Some people have them in higher concentrations, and some in lower concentrations”. The labs always work with some preconditions. They never look blindly to identify which virus it could be. They are being told to look for a flu virus and if the time is right and media already announced the flu spreading, they set the parameters for the test so they will diagnose the flu virus. And they even feel good about it because they did a good job then, right?

            Like

          4. Just as with DNA, which you say cannot be used as a fingerprint tool, but which I have seen used twice to bring about justice, and accurately, I conclude I must take my obervations as serious evidence, and your prognostications as idle speculation. I have seen in this world a whole array of phonies on all levels, in medicine and cosmology and history and astrophysics. But I cannot extrapolate from that to “everything is fake” and now your “there is no disease.” Those are as wrongheaded as any other outlook. My best guess is that “it is complicated” not as a panacea and excuse not to think, but rather as a dictum that we must work hard at thinking, and never quit.

            Like

          5. It’s all on wikipedia Mark. If the carrier of the genetic code changes constantly, how can it do, what it is supposed to Mark: carry the genetic code? I described you how the DNA-test works and explained that it makes no sense. Was my explanation wrong? You prefer to believe what they told you about how they caught the guy, fine. The same with diseases. The majority of people believe that they get infected with flu while they simply develop the same symptoms under the same conditions (overheated house in winter) than their relatives. Why there never is the entire kindergarten sick, always only some of the kids? Never mind. Suggestions are a very mighty weapon and many people like to fall for them. Have a nice weekend.

            Like

          6. A neighbour of mine, may be 10 years ago or so, had a massively swollen leg. He went to his doctor. The doctor said he had Deep Vein Thrombosis, which meant he got seen to straight away. Next, other doctors came and examined his leg, and asked him questions like ‘when did you last fly?’ ecc. He told them he’d never flown, and didn’t do this or that. They were stumped. He was sent to hospital in the next town. They examined him there and asked the same questions. They did tests that showed he didn’t have DVT – I forget what it actually was. He went back to his local doctor. His local dottor said they were all wrong!
            DVT at the time was in all the papers. “It’s in the papers, it must be that!”
            Lies, damned lies and medical experts.

            Like

          7. “It’s all on wikipedia Mark …” – pretty condescending, ya think?

            Anyway, you are underthinking this stuff, settling on an overly simplistic explanation to brush away complicated matters. Things should be made as simple as possible, but not more so. I see nothing that indicates that the transcriptase process alters the coding of the DNA, only that it can be reversed, which is why they invented to concept of a “retrovirus.” They cannot explain it otherwise, and claim that a retrovirus is an aberration, hence a disease carrier. It is bullshit.

            However, you might want to consider thta the vast majority of our DNA is alike, which is why we are all human beings. The DNA that is making its way as evidence in courts is a very small slice of the chain, a few percentage points, that differ among us and are unique to an individual, or identical twins.

            You’re wrong.

            Liked by 1 person

          8. Maybe if commenters would ignore this person/troll/sockpuppet it would stop with it’s insane rambling…I know I am done with “it”.

            Like

  5. I actually like raw beef as tatar, which is minced beef with raw egg and spices. Yum. If you had stomach problems for weeks, it could be caused by a mixture of bad condition at the time and wrong attitude. I’ve never experienced such thing myself. On our Caribbean vacation some years ago we had excellent food and plenty and I tried to try everything out and soon got stomach problems but only for a day. I just didn’t eat anything until I was empty (I drunk lots of water and kept near the toilet for a day and a night) and then slowly started to refill the intestines with new garbage. Works every time for me. Liking food or not is a brain thing. I Chinese friend of mine can’t stand when somebody eats cheese. Pizza is ok though. Some of the thing she eats look very ugly to me. Fried chicken legs for instance and I don’t mean the upper parts. She eats the claws.

    Like

  6. Tainted water from run off & fluoride. Natural foods grown in clean dirt. Vapors released from plastics (thing of the automobile composite dash board baking the the sun w/windows shut) the past 60 years. These are atip of ice berg when talking of what is causing sicknesses & attacks on the human immune systems. MAN MADE CHEMICALS are everywhere today. Up next WI-FI & Cell Tower abuses.

    Like

    1. Good point. Reminds me of endocrine disruptors:

      “Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that may interfere with the body’s endocrine system and produce adverse developmental, reproductive, neurological, and immune effects in both humans and wildlife. A wide range of substances, both natural and man-made, are thought to cause endocrine disruption, including pharmaceuticals, dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls, DDT and other pesticides, and plasticizers such as bisphenol A. Endocrine disruptors may be found in many everyday products– including plastic bottles, metal food cans, detergents, flame retardants, food, toys, cosmetics, and pesticides. NIEHS supports studies to determine whether exposure to endocrine disruptors may result in human health effects including lowered fertility and an increased incidence of endometriosis and some cancers. Research shows that endocrine disruptors may pose the greatest risk during prenatal and early postnatal development when organ and neural systems are forming.”

      https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/endocrine/index.cfm

      Our food and water supplies and lands are saturated with manmade chemicals. This has been the case since the late 19th century, when the chemical industry underwent a tremendous expansion.
      The wife and I are aiming to remove as much plastic from our house as we can. When you start looking for potential endocrine disruptors you notice they’re everywhere – plastic wrap, ziplock bags, food storage containers, kitchen utensils, refillable water bottles, credit cards, ID cards, electronic devices, skin care products, hair care products, household cleaning products, shower curtains, car interiors, etc.
      Simplifying one’s life seems to be the right approach, in my opinion. From a physiological standpoint the basic needs for sustaining human life haven’t changed throughout our species’ history. We all need proper nutrition, rest, movement, affection through touch, and so on. We can really thrive when these needs are fulfilled in a sustainable way.
      For all of those who have chosen to worship at the church of Transhumanism I would say, “You really want to build a superman? Forget your horrific implant technology and give him the cleanest food and water on earth; let him rest; allow him to transport himself using his own body; provide him with love, friendship and affection.”
      So here we come to the crux of the problem: if the planet really is overpopulated, in relation to its resources, then it will not be possible for every human being to live as described above. We cannot all eat organic fruits and vegetables, grass-fed beef and free-range chicken, fresh caught salmon free of mercury poisoning. There cannot be 7 billion + “super-humans.” If this is the analysis of TPTB then it could explain their colossal efforts to construct a false reality for all of us. If, on the other hand, the population numbers are false and we do have more than enough to go around then TPTB are simply the greediest assholes who ever walked the earth. In any case, the result is the same: we are being poisoned, distracted, miseducated, undermined.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. speaking of transhumanism, this is a must watch for the background on MKUltra, cybernetics etc…almost 4 hours in length but shows actual documentary footage of MK Ultra experiments after WW2…by truthstream media YT…they do excellent work

        Like

  7. Frauline, you are not superior to anyone here. Phizzy is a dead ringer for you and vice versa. But, you may indeed be 2 persons, but for sure share the same age/gender/traits & especially that nationality.

    Like

  8. Citing Dr. Jennifer Daniels once again, my recollection from her episode on AIDS is that AZT was admitted by the mainstream to be deadly. That is, a year or two into its use for AIDS, JAMA (or some big medical journal) published on its dangers. However, they did so with little fanfare and in veiled jargon (as they often do with sensitive topics it seems), and with no mass media attention. I can’t remember if she said they then modified the formula to something safer, or what.

    Like

  9. Testing HIV positive after a Hep B vaccine, did I read that correctly?
    It looks some of the States already this year, are restoring funding for HIV medicine and prevention programs. Possible free health care for those that can prove they are infected with HIV…

    Like

    1. sounds like they want to get rid of poison and are looking for volunteers. Good luck with that. As for your last comment Mark, you’re right of course, our DNa ist mostly alike. They even admit, that the earthworm has almost the same DNA. Same thing with antibodies. The same antibodies are everywhere. It’s because life is made of it. Genetic code is but an abstract idea. We don’t really know why our children usually look alike, we also don’t know why sometimes they don’t. And it’s not always because the neighbor is the father.

      Like

      1. Your theories are not well thought out, just broad generalities, not studied. I don’t give them much weight. I don’t pretend for a second that I have figured things out, only that when confronted with evidence, I do not ignore it.

        Like

        1. when I ask you Mark, what evidence do you have, that DNA fingerprint test works, you’ll tell me, that’s how they found the other guy. They somehow found the guy and told you it was due to the DNA fingerprint test. You may believe this, but I don’t. There is no way to find the same DNA probe in a database because they all look so much alike. If you don’t find differences it does not mean there aren’t any. And they don’t tell us how they encode the extreme complex biological DNA code in a relatively simple digital database if the most of it is identical for all humans. If they create two gel electrophoresis patterns using the same DNA probe two times, they’ll get two very different pictures. Yet still they claim to be able to tell if a pattern from another DNA probe belongs to the same DNA. It hast to be magic. It is not me to bring the evidence that the DNA fingerprint test doesn’t works. It’s them to prove and demonstrate that it works. I told you, there was this claim in the scientific community back then when the DNA-test was first published to split 1000 blood samples and to order them using this test to measure it’s accuracy. They never did such thing. It’s all based on consensus and not on if it’s true or not. The fortune teller may “read” true things from your hand but it does not prove, that he really can read anything.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s