Is the African AIDS pandemic a bluff?

Afrol News ^ | 2 Jun 07 | Rainer Chr. Hennig, afrol News editor

[Doc Savage]

Gee Smooth Talker, perjaps you’d like to regale us with your Ph.D. bio. What a maroon! You wouldn’t wouldn’t know a retrovirus if it bit you in your ponderous ass! “I’ve been to Africa.............” Perhaps you’ll win the Nobel Prize for Science! You clowns slay me!

[xzins]

Wow, I need your link to this data.

Also, I’ve long wondered if auto-immunity was at work. What do you think?

[George W. Bush]

Thanks again George Bush.

You're welcome. Can I double up that "AIDS" money?

As many of us have said from the very beginning, there is not and has never been any AIDS crisis in Africa. It's a complete scam, a welfare plan for Africa schemed up by the U.N. Just another globalist fraud with the U.N. taking its cut for the corrupt bureaucracy.

[DilJective]

You are absolutely correct! Not one mention of "medication" is mentioned in the constitution or forcing me to pay for anyone else's charity.

I'd like a government that fits inside the constitution...as Harry Browne once said.

[little jeremiah]

I really know nothing...other than what I read on FR! Being uneducated, I have to depend on those who know about the subject. I have read a lot that what they call “AIDS” in Africa is anything that causes illness. Compounded with malnutrition, parasites and zillions of tropical and other diseases aggravated by filth and poverty.

It is interesting and if you find out anything convincing, ping me.

I’ve also read theories involving increasing amount vaccines and anti-biotics are messing with peoples’ immune systems. These things are not harmless.

[yahoo]

No one wants to be heartless about sick people, but why is there 45 billion for questionable aids in africa and no funding for a fence in America?

Illegal immigration is a disease. The Mexipult is the cure.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

Easy indiscriminate sex like a bunch of bonobo monkeys accounts for the high incidence of this disease.

[PeterPrinciple]

Perhaps the exact numbers are off but i’ve been to Africa twice on mission trips and I can assure you that AIDS has spread a ton of human misery on that continent. In some countries average live expectancy is down almost 20 years. Yes the population may be growing in Africa but thats because of an absurdly high birthrate. A lot of folks are dying young over there and the tragedy should not be minimized.

---

How do you know it is aids and not malaria or other disease?

[EQAndyBuzz]

“The purpose of AIDS programs in Africa is to allow African governments freer access to western money than previously allowed.”

AIDS in Africa is the new global warming.

[Nathan Zachary]

"while there indeed is a worrying prevalence of HIV on the continent - the numbers presented by the UN agency UNAIDS and national health authorities are highly inflated."

Now that's an understatement

Like all the information spewed by the many NGO's under the UN 's roof in regards to any issue, it's either highly inflated of a downright lie, the more dramatic the better so that suckers seeing those info shows will send them more money, so that they can continue driving brand new land rovers, eat fine French foods, and live in 5 star hotels.

[visualops]

Shikwati: Why do we get these mountains of clothes? No one is freezing here. Instead, our tailors lose their livelihoods. They're in the same position as our farmers. No one in the low-wage world of Africa can be cost-efficient enough to keep pace with donated products. In 1997, 137,000 workers were employed in Nigeria's textile industry. By 2003, the figure had dropped to 57,000. The results are the same in all other areas where overwhelming helpfulness and fragile African markets collide.

[visualops]

I could be wrong- but I thought I read many years ago, about India having the same problem. But they got a grip on it and basically said stop sending food- we need to take care of ourselves.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Remember, we MUST TRUST the UN with our population (control), future energy (control), future medical research and the Internet (control), and future economic (control) because the UN knows all and is NOT influenced by propaganda or bad math. Or criminal blackmail by socialists.

But we MUST trust the UN with our global warming symptoms as well.

[Robert A Cook PE]

iF (big IF) it were really AIDS, then the death rate would not be stagnant: instead, it is (mostly) politics and corruption.

Other diseases, hidden by the AIDS bandwagon -> the rate of supposed AIDS in Africa makes no sense compared to anywhere else.

Other terrible diseases caused by the governments in Africa and their corruption? Absolutely - Yes. But not AIDS.

[Robert A Cook PE]

What is your convention for the numbers?

1x2% ? I haven’t used that format before.

[neverdem]

Heterosexual transmission of HIV in Africa is no higher than anywhere else

It's almost halfway down the page. You may have to register for it, but it's free.

[hedgetrimmer]

It could be.

Tony Blair resigned his prime minister-ship in the UK so he could concentrate on making Africa economically integrated so that a regional government can be set up.

He needs American taxpayer dollars to pay for it because we have paid for all global integration into regional marketplaces or ‘trading blocs’ that will replace the so-called antiquated notion of nations without our knowledge or consent.

His victim countries may have figured out they can ask for more money and get it, thats how desperate the globalists are to turn roughly 200 or so countries into 9 or 10 regional trading blocs. The absence of nations and national sovereignty makes it much more convenient.

[JasonC]

There was a thread on FR several years ago now, in which we went through the population growth in Africa over the time of the epidemic. I found the population of sub saharan Africa continued to grow at 3% per year exactly on trend, showing absolutely no evidence of any new significant cause of premature death. Thousands, even low tens, would not have altered those stats, but anything claiming 10% prevalence or more for a 90-100% mortality disease would definitely have shown up. It isn't there.

[wolf78]

Wow, the same old pseudo-scientific bullsh*t told by quacks, miracle healers and other esoteric freaks for years.

But, only antibodies against HIV are found in most patients (1–7)**. Therefore, “HIV infection is identified in blood by detecting antibodies, gene sequences, or viral isolation.” But, HIV can only be “isolated” from rare, latently infected lymphocytes that have been cultured for weeks in vitro – away from the antibodies of the human host (8). Thus HIV behaves like a latent passenger virus.

First of all, the diagnosis for HIV-seroposivity is threefold: If an ELISA-screening test for antibodies comes back positive, a more specific Western Blot antibody test is done (to eliminate false positives which are prone to happen in the case of certain autoimmune diseases or other infections). Then, a RT-PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction), using primers specific to HIV's genome, test is done and viral load is determined.

But, the AIDS literature has described at least 4621 HIVfree AIDS cases according to one survey – irrespective of, or in agreement with allowances made by the CDC for HIV-free AIDS cases (55).

AIDS is a syndrome, not a disease. The clinical diagnosis would be "HIV infection" or "seroposivity for HIV". The AID-syndrome develops as a result of HIV infection (due to the depletion of T-Cells), just like a patient with lung cancer will start to cough (and it would be wrong to diagnose him with a common cold).

But, retroviruses do not kill cells because they depend on viable cells for the replication of their RNA from viral DNA integrated into cellular DNA (4, 25). Thus, T-cells infected in vitro thrive, and those patented to mass-produce HIV for the detection of HIV antibodies and diag nosis of AIDS are immortal (9–15)!

Again, from a scientific standpoint that is just as absurd as saying that you cannot die from ebola as the disease needs the patient to survive. T-Cell depletion due to HIV-infection is a well-documented fact.
While from an evolutionary standpoint it is true that over the course of centuries those variants of an infectious agent that do not kill immediately and thus are able to spread tend to be the most successful, the latent period of an HIV infection of up to ten years or more already fits that criteria.

But, HIV is said to be “the sole cause of AIDS”, or of 26 different immunodeficiency and non-immunodeficiency diseases, all of which also occur without HIV. Thus there is not one HIV-specific disease, which is the definition of a passenger virus!

Again, you confuse HIV seroposivity with AIDS. AIDS is syndrome and as such usually the final stage of HIV infection. AIDS is defined by two criteria: A very low T-Cell count and as a result susceptibility to certain diseases which pose no threat to an immunocompetent person. The distinction is for example necessary, because, depending on their genetic makeup, some HIV-positive patients will not develop AIDS for decades.

But, AIDS is observed – by definition – only after anti- HIV immunity is established, a positive HIV/AIDS test (23). Thus HIV cannot cause AIDS by “the same criteria” as conventional viruses.

Where did you get that nonsense that the presence of antibodies automatically equals total immunity? That is just total BS.

Yes, repeated vaccinations against the measles generate immunity. But just take chickenpox: Although you develop antibodies against the varicella virus, you are not able to clear the virus from your body: It remains dormant and can, in case your immune system is compromised (e.g. due to cancer, stress, whatever) cause shingles.

But, HIV replicates in 1 day, generating over 100 new HIVs per cell (24, 25). Accordingly, HIV is immunogenic, i.e. biochemically most active, within weeks after infection (26, 27). Thus, based on conventional criteria “for other viral disea ses”, HIV should also cause AIDS within weeks – if it could.

What you mean is "acute HIV syndrome", which indeed can resemble AIDS, but more often a severe flu. That is before the body develops antibodies which are able to keep the virus in check for a period of months to decades - before finally succumbing to it.

But, despite enormous efforts there is no such vaccine to this day (31). Moreover, since AIDS occurs by definition only in the presence of natural antibodies against HIV (§ 3), and since natural antibodies are so effective that no HIV is detectable in AIDS patients (see No. 1), even the hopes for a vaccine are irrational.

Nonsense. You can the HI-Virus in the bloodstream within hours to days using RT-PCR methods, weeks before the body develops antibodies. The reason why vaccine trials so far have failed is the same why the immune system eventually succumbs to HIV: Because other than in the case of measles the HIV-virus is covered in sugar molecules which the body does not recognize as foreign. Thus it is very hard for antibodies, which work based on the "lock and key"-principle, to find a proper site to attack the virus. Current research in the field of vaccination thus concentrates on finding "weak spots" in the HI-Virus's hull.

But, only 1 in 1000 unprotected sexual contacts transmits HIV (32–34), and only 1 of 275 US citizens is HIV-infected (29, 30), (figure 1b). Therefore, an average un-infected US citizen needs 275,000 random “sexual contacts” to get infected and spread HIV – an unlikely basis for an epidemic!

The 1 in 1000 likelyhood only goes for the insertive intercourse under ideal circumstances (i.e.: No tears, lesions etc.). But just take an undetected syphillis chancre within the vagina or anus and these odds change drastically.

“AIDS spreads by infection” of HIV. But, contrary to the spread of AIDS, there is no “spread” of HIV in the US. In the US HIV infections have remained constant at 1 million from 1985 (29) until now (30), (see also The Durban Declaration and figure 1b). By contrast, AIDS has increased from 1981 until 1992 and has declined ever since (figure 1a). That's just playing with words: AIDS has decreased drastically, because due to new drug regimens fewer people reach that stage of an HIV infection. The number of people living with HIV on the other hand remains high and new infections are on the rise:



But, in the peer-reviewed literature there is not one doctor or nurse who has ever contracted AIDS (not just HIV) from the over 816,000 AIDS patients recorded in the US in 22 years (30). Not one of over ten thousand HIV researchers has contracted AIDS. Wives of hemophiliacs do not get AIDS (35). And there is no AIDS-epidemic in prostitutes (36–38). Thus AIDS is not contagious (39, 40).

That's because it's very hard to transmit HIV, as you need to get it into the bloodstream. If a doctor uses the necessary precautions and if a couple of different serostatus henceforth has safer sex, infection is almost impossible.

But, in the US and Europe AIDS is restricted since 1981 to two main risk groups, intravenous drug users and male homosexual drug users (§ 1 and 4).

Because of the low overall prevalence. But that is about to change in the US (not so much in Europe), where the fastest growing group among the newly infected is African American women.

AIDS should be a pediatric epidemic now, because HIV is transmitted “from mother to infant” at rates of 25–50% (44– 49), and because “34×3 million people worldwide” were already infected in 2000. To reduce the high maternal transmission rate HIV-antibody-positive pregnant mothers are treated with AZT for up to 6 months prior to birth (§ 4).
But, less than 1% of AIDS in the US and Europe is pediatric (30, 50). Thus HIV must be a passenger virus in newborns.

If the following protocol is strictly adhered to:

- Perinatal antiretroviral therapy
- C-section
- NO BREASTFEEDING

Today there is a 99'% chance of having a healthy baby, even if the mother is HIV positive.

But, the presumably HIV-caused AIDS epidemics of Africa and of the US and Europe differ both clinically and epidemiologically (§ 1, table 2). The US/European epidemic is highly nonrandom, 80% male and restricted to abnormal risk groups, whereas the African epidemic is random.

That only goes for parts of the US anymore. The situation in southern states is changing rapidly.

[GregoryFul]

The African AIDS scam has been exposed for a long time now. Since AIDS is a darling cause of the left, gliterori, celebrity numnuts, maniacal special interest groups, starry-eyed moon-bats, fudge-packers, and every other moronic instance of mankind, every African disease with symptoms resembling AIDS is cataloged as AIDS, so as to compete for bucks from the fawning cock sucking dolts, and corrupt government officials practicing maleficence with no inhibition from neglect of the public purse for MSM glory.