AIDS: Still no proof that it is caused by HIV

The following passages are excerpted from Dr. Kary Mullis’s 1998 book Dancing Naked in the Mind Field. I have probably violated fair use by citing so much, but as I transcribed it yesterday I thought it important to put on display how corrupt our system of medical research and treatment is.  It is best summarized by this passage from below:

“They had been trained to obtain grants from the government, hire people to do research, and write papers that usually ended with the notion that further research should be done along the same lines – preferably by them and paid for by someone else.”

The current SARS-Cov-2 crisis is no different – there is no proof, only overpaid researchers and doctors who are not used to being questioned by an extremely gullible public – who have come to worship them as once they did priests and witch doctors. The whole of the “COVID-19 pandemic” is really just quackery, behind which is a political agenda.

Since this is a non-monetized blog, I feel safe in using this long citation, as I will simply be asked to take it down by the publisher. But I cite no links. I do recommend the book, as Mullis has stuff to say about not just AIDS, but climate change and the ozone layer as well. Good stuff.

I’ll have to work out the typos later today,as we are off on a hike.

---

“… I was working as a consultant at Specialty Labs in Santa Monica. Specialty was trying to develop a means of using PCR to detect retroviruses in the thousands of blood donations received per day by the Red Cross. I was writing a report on our progress for the project sponsor, and I began by stating, “HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.”

                I asked a virologist at Specialty where I could find the reference for HIV being the cause of AIDS.

                “You don’t need a reference,” he told me. “Everybody knows it.”

“I’d like to quote a reference.” I felt a little funny about not knowing the source of such an important discovery. Everyone else seemed to.

“Why don’t you just cite the CDC report?” he suggested, giving me a copy of the Centers for Disease Control’s periodic report on morbidity and mortality. I read it. It wasn’t a scientific article. It simply said that an organism had been identified – it did not say how. It requested that doctors report any patients showing certain symptoms and test them for antibodies to this organism. The report did not identify the original scientific work, but that didn’t surprise me. It was intended for physicians, who didn’t need to know the source of the information. Physicians assume that if the CDC was convinced, there must exist real proof somewhere that HIV was the cause of AIDS.

A proper scientific reference usually a published article in a reliable scientific magazine. These days the magazines are slick glossy paper with pictures on the front and lots of advertisements, a lot of editorial material by people who are professional journalists, and a few pictures of girls selling you things you might want to buy for your lab. The advertisers are the companies who make the things for scientists to buy and the companies who make the drugs for doctors to sell. There are no major journals without advertisements. Therefore there are no major journals without corporate connections.

Scientists submit the articles in order to report their work. Preparing articles describing their work and having them published is crucial to a scientist’s career. Without articles in major journals they will lose their rank. The articles may not be submitted until experiments supported the conclusions drawn are finished and analyzed. In primary journals, every single experimental detail has to be there either directly or by reference, so that somebody else could repeat exactly what was done and find out whether he comes out the same way in their hands. If it doesn’t somebody will report that in the conflict eventually has to be resolved so that when we go on from here, we will know where “here” is. Most reliable primary journals are refereed. After you send your article, the editor sent copies of it to several of your colleagues for review. They become the referees. The editors are paid for their work on the journal, the referees are not. But what they do gives them power, which most of them like.

I did computer searches. Neither (French virologist Luc] Montagnier, [Robert] Gallo, or anyone else had published papers describing experiments which led to the conclusion that HIV probably causes AIDS. I read the papers in Science for which they had become well known as the AIDS doctors, but all they had done was that they had found evidence of a past infection by something which was probably HIV in some AIDS patients. They found antibodies. Antibodies to viruses had always been considered evidence of past disease, not present disease. Antibodies signaled that the virus had been defeated. Patient had saved himself. There was no indication in these papers that this virus caused the disease. They didn’t show that everybody with the antibodies had the disease. In fact they found some healthy people with antibodies.

If Montagnier and Gallo hadn’t really found this evidence, why was their work published, and why had they been fighting so hard to get credit for the discovery? There had been an international incident wherein Robert Gallo of the NIH had claimed that a sample of HIV which had been sent to him by Luc Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute in Paris had not grown and Gallo’s lab. Other samples collected by Gallo and his collaborators, from potential AIDS patients, had grown. Gallo had patented the AIDS test based on these samples, and the Pasteur Institute had sued. Pasteur eventually won, but back in 1989 it was a standoff and they were sharing the profits.

I was hesitant to write “HIV is the probable cause of AIDS” until I found published evidence that would support it. Mine was the most minimal statement possible. My grant request I wasn’t trying to stay that it absolutely did cause AIDS, I was just trying to say it was likely to cause it for some known reasons. Tens of thousands of scientists and researchers were spending millions of dollars a year doing research based on this idea. The reason had to be there somewhere, otherwise these people would not have allowed the research to settle into one narrow channel investigation.

I lectured about PCR at innumerable meetings. Always there were people there talking about HIV. I asked them how it was that we knew that HIV was the cause of AIDS. Everyone said something. Everyone had the answer at home in the office or in some drawer. The all knew and would send some of the papers as soon as they got back. But I never got any papers. Nobody ever sent me news about how AIDS was caused by HIV.

I finally had the opportunity to ask Dr. Montagnier about the reference when he lectured in San Diego in a grand opening of the UCSD AIDS Research Center, which is still run by Bob Gallo’s former consort, Dr. Flossie Wong-Staal. This would be the last time I would ask my question without showing anger. In response Dr. Montagnier suggested, “Why don’t you reference the CDC report?”

“I read it,” I said, “that doesn’t really address the issue of whether or not HIV is the probable cause of AIDS, does it?”

He agreed with me it was damned irritating. If Montagnier did not know the answer, who the hell did?

Page 171

[On the pursuit of a viral cause of cancer] If they wanted to cure cancer, the research should be directed elsewhere. Whether it was because they were more interested in curing their own poverty than cancer, or that they just couldn’t come to grips with their mistake, they continued to work fruitlessly on a viral oncogene hypothesis for 10 years. And they didn’t seem to notice the irony: the more frustrated they got, the more they chastised Peter Duesberg for questioning his own theory and their folly. Most of them had not really learn much of what I call science. They had been trained to obtain grants from the government, hire people to do research, and write papers that usually ended with the notion that further research should be done along the same lines – preferably by them and paid for by someone else. One of them was Bob Gallo.

Page 175

In spite of his lack of luster as a scientist, Gallo had worked his way up in the power structure. Peter Duesberg, despite his brilliance, worked his way down. By the time AIDS came along, it was Bob Gallo who Margaret Heckler approached when President Reagan decided that enough homosexuals picketing the White House was enough. Margaret was the Secretary of Health Education and Welfare and thereby the top dog at NIH. Bob Gallo had a sample of a virus that Luc Montagnier had found in the lymph node of a gay decorator in Paris with AIDS. Montagnier had sent to Gallo for evaluation and Bob had appropriated it in pursuit of his own career.

                Margaret called a press conference and introduce Dr. Robert Gallo, was suavely pulled off his wraparound sunglasses and announced to the world press, “Gentlemen, we have found the cause of AIDS!” And that was it. Gallo and Hector predicted that the vaccine and a cure would be available within a couple of years. That was 1984.

Page 176

The CDC has defined AIDS as one of more than 30 diseases accompanied by a positive result on a test that detects antibodies to HIV. But the same diseases are not defined as AIDS cases when the antibodies are not detected. If an HIV-positive woman develops uterine cancer, for example, she is considered to have AIDS. If she is not HIV-positive, she simply has uterine cancer. And HIV-positive man with tuberculosis has a AIDS; if you test negative he simply has tuberculosis. If he lives in Kenya or Colombia, where the test for AIDS antibodies is too expensive, his simply presumed to have the antibodies and therefore AIDS, and therefore he can be treated in the World Health Organization’s clinic. It’s the only medical help available in some places. And it’s free, because the countries that support the WHO are worried about AIDS. From the point of view is spreading medical facilities and areas where poor people live, AIDS has been a boon. We don’t poison them with AZT like we do our own people because it’s too expensive. We supply dressings for the machete cut on their left knee and call it AIDS.

Page 179

The CDC continues to add new diseases to the grand AIDS definition. The CDC is virtually doctored the books to make it appear as if the disease continues to spread. In 1993, for example, the CDC enormously braodened its AIDS definition. This was happily accepted by County health authorities, who receive $2,500 from the feds per year under the Ryan White Act for every reported AIDS case.

In 1634 Galileo was sentenced to house arrest for the last eight years of his life for writing that the Earth is not the center of the universe but rather moves around the sun. Because he insisted the scientific statement should not be a matter of religious faith, he was accused of heresy. Years from now, people looking back at us will find our acceptance of the HIV theory of AIDS as silly as we find the leaders who excommunicated Galileo. Science is it is practiced today in the world is largely not science at all. What people call science is probably very similar to what was called science in 1634. Galileo was told to recant his beliefs or be excommunicated. People who refuse to accept the commandments of the AIDS establishment are basically told the same thing. “If you don’t accept what we say, you’re out.”

Page 180