Tag Archives: HIV

Without Another Co-Factor, HIV Cannot Cause AIDS

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

Contrary to the original HIV-AIDS hypothesis, which says there is a 50-100 percent probability of death from infection, there are only a few HIV infected people who actually die, at least not more than in any other category of disease.

When blood from AIDS patients was injected into chimpanzees in 1983, all of them tested HIV positive but when tested 10 years later, none of them had developed any signs of sickness. In another experiment, over 150 chimpanzees received injections of purified (highly concentrated) HIV in 1984, but developed no symptoms of disease to this very day. However, what the experiments did show was that their immune systems had produced antibodies against the virus within a month, just as it happens in humans. The presence of antibodies ensures that immunity against the microbes has been secured on a permanent basis. Just as animals cannot get AIDS from HIV, so can human beings not get AIDS from HIV either.

HIV cannot cause as much as the flu

Among other human viruses, such as those causing polio, flu, hepatitis, etc., HIV may be one of the most harmless ones; it is quickly and easily neutralized by our immune system. The incubation period for every known virus does not exceed more than a maximum of 6 weeks, as is the case with the human hepatitis virus. It is a well-established biological law that any germ that does not cause symptoms before it is cleared by the immune system cannot be considered a cause of disease. No virus is capable of surviving 10-15 years in a normal healthy body with an active immune system.And even if it were possible in theory that a few virus particles would survive a decade or longer, they still would have to overcome the immune system, and they would certainly not be enough in number to impair the person’s immunity (unless of course the immune system is destroyed by other causes).

The AIDS theory suggests that HIV destroys the immune system’s T4 cells, thereby leaving the body susceptible to all kinds of infections and diseases. It had already been discovered in the mid-eighties that the number of HIV infected T4 cells is far too small to cause widespread destruction and that the human body is perfectly capable of replacing T4 cells faster than HIV could destroy them.

Since the beginning of AIDS as we know it, many thousands of people, including medical workers and hemophiliacs, were accidentally infected with HIV, but only a few of them developed AIDS – in fact, not more than any other group in society. Among the health workers who developed AIDS, 90 percent belonged to the major risk group of AIDS cases – highly active homosexuals and intravenous drug users. Among hemophiliacs, who are ‘naturally’ immune-deficient, there are just as many HIV-negatives dying as there are HIV-positives dying. In other words, whether a hemophiliac is infected or not, his chances of developing an AIDS-type disease are exactly the same.

Until now, there has not been even one human or animal that has developed AIDS after being infected only with HIV. This fact may be reason enough to reconsider the role of HIV as being the sole agent responsible for causing dozens of different kinds of (AIDS) diseases. Luc Montagnier, co-discoverer of the HIV virus, has already pointed out that, without another co-factor, HIV cannot cause AIDS.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

What Really Causes AIDS?

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

Over 35 diseases have now been renamed AIDS diseases, all supposedly caused by one single (inactive) virus. What has been considered normal pneumonia until 10-15 years ago, if linked with HIV, it is now an AIDS disease. The same applies to Candida infection, tuberculosis, Kaposi’s sarcoma, and cervical cancer. If an African suffers from ‘slim disease’ and has HIV antibodiesin his blood, he is being told that he has AIDS. If he dies from the disease, he obviously must have died from AIDS. This simple logic may sound persuasive to a lay person.

On the other hand, if an African is diagnosed with having ‘slim disease’ without previous HIV infection and subsequently dies, AIDS is not considered the cause of death. It is worthy to note that there are at least as many cases of slim disease without HIV as there are with HIV, and that the retrovirus HIV has proven to be incapable of causing cell destruction, which is the main characteristic accompanying ‘slim disease’.

If the HIV virus cannot be held responsible for causing AIDS diseases, then what is the cause of AIDS?

Narcotic Drugs

Roughly ten years before the discovery of AIDS, the industrial world experienced a dramatic increase in the use of non-prescribed drugs ranging from hashish, marijuana and psychedelics to LSD, MDA, PCP, heroin, cocaine, amyl and butyl nitrites, amphetamines, barbiturates, ethyl chloride, opium, mushrooms and other ‘tailor-made’ drugs. By 1974, five million Americans had used the drug cocaine, and only 11 years later, the figure had jumped to over 22 million. In 1990, the American Drug Enforcement Administration had confiscated 100,000 kilograms of cocaine, compared to a mere 500 kilograms in 1980. Within a decade, the number of cocaine overdose victims had increased from 3,000 in 1981 to 80,000 in 1990, an increase of 2,400 percent. Amphetamine use also jumped dramatically. In 1989, the Drug Enforcement Administration seized 97 million doses, up from 2 million doses in 1981. Also, aphrodisiacs became extremely popular during the 1970s. By 1980, five million Americans had become regular users of amyl nitrites, or ‘poppers’.

The AIDS epidemic followed a huge jump in drug abuse. Every practicing physician who has seen the severe destruction of body and mind in drug-using patients understands that drugs are capable of doing even more harm to a person than just killing them. Drugs are known for their powerful effect of systematically destroying a person’s vital functions, including the immune system. The figures given above can in no way represent the total use of drugs within the population, but they certainly indicate that drug abuse could be playing a major role, if not the biggest role in causing AIDS diseases. Most narcotic drug users have p24in their blood. An HIV test is likely going to turn them into HIV positive patients that ‘need’ treatment with expensive and potentially devastating AIDS drugs.

Until recently, drug use was most concentrated among young men aged 25-44, and so, AIDS was most common among this age group. Nine out of every ten AIDS cases were male and 90 percent of all people arrested for possession of hard drugs were male, too. 75 percent of these were aged 25-44 and 72 percent of all AIDS cases among men occurred within exactly the same age group. Could this have been pure coincidence?

Between 1983 and 1987, the death rate among young men of this age group increased by an average of 10,000 per year and so did the number of AIDS deaths within the same period. During the 1980s, deaths from drug overdoses doubled in men of this age group, while deaths from blood poisoning – an indirect result of the injection of drugs into the blood – quadrupled. The same happened to the AIDS sufferers of the same age group during the same period of time.

Now, more women are involved in heavy drug use. Three quarters of all heterosexual AIDS cases and two thirds of all female AIDS cases are injection drug users. Two thirds of all babies born with AIDS have mothers who inject drugs. These figures do not include the use of drugs taken orally or in an inhaled form.

The major percentage of AIDS cases, however, is still found among the highly active homosexual men aged 25-44. This group not only abuses large quantities of narcotic drugs, but also antibiotics, antifungals, and antivirals, such as AZT, ddI, ddC, d4T, acyclovir, and gancyclovir, to name a few. A large number of American studies confirmed that over 95 percent of male homosexual AIDS patients typically admitted to popper inhalation and regular use of hard drugs.

AIDS patients suffer from pre-existing immune damage, which in many cases is caused by years of drug abuse. Without an already damaged immune system, AIDS diseases are extremely unlikely to develop. If any of the above risk groups take an AIDS test they are highly likely to test positive, due to the large number of antibodies their bodies have produced to counteract diseases caused by drugs, semen, blood, and viruses, etc.

Why babies have AIDS

Babies are strongly affected by the drug abuse of their mothers. Two thirds of all babies with AIDS symptoms, regardless whether they test HIV-positive or not, have mothers who inject drugs; some large percentage of the rest have mothers who use non-injected drugs. Heroin is one of the most commonly injected drugs. Persistent drug users show symptoms of loss of white blood cells, the main upholder of immunity, as well as lymph node swelling, fever, rapid weight loss, brain dysfunction and dementia, and a marked susceptibility to infections. Heroin addicts often die from pneumonia, tuberculosis, and other opportunistic infections, as well as from wasting syndromes. In all these diseases, the protein p24, generally accepted to be proof of the existence of HIV, is amply present. Although p24 is not unique to HIV but shared with most infectious diseases, they have nevertheless been classified as AIDS diseases.

What is very sad is that babies are defenseless against drug poisoning. Recent research has shown that pregnant women who smoke cigarettes pass cancer-forming chemicals to their babies. It is difficult to imagine what must be taking place in the developing brain of an embryo when it is exposed to heroin injected directly into his mother’s blood, which is also his blood.

Many babies born to cocaine-using mothers are born with severe mental retardation and are vulnerable to tuberculosis and lung diseases. The major experimental drugs are so poisonous that regular use can result in dementia, serious bacterial infections, and total destruction of the immune system. The drugs certainly possess a much higher probability of impairing immune functions so typical to AIDS than a simple, inactive virus.

Antibiotics

Most of the patients suffering from AIDS also have a long history of taking antibiotics. Antibiotics may be a major co-factor in developing AIDS among the very active homosexual men who depend on them in order to ward off the many venereal diseases and parasites arising from non-hygienic sexual practices. Many gays have received open prescriptions for antibiotics from their doctors who advised them to swallow the drugs before their sexual encounters. Some of them had been on such toxic drugs as Tetracycline for as many as 18 years before their immune system succumbed to the devastating side effects they produce. This particular drug causes extreme sensitivity against sunlight. If exposed to sunlight, it can burn one’s skin beyond repair. Those affected often suffer from Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), a form of depression that arises from lack of exposure to sunlight. The drug is also known to disrupt the body’s basic metabolic functions, which may result in virtually any type of disease. It also works as a strong immune suppressant; and, perhaps, one of its worst side effects is the destruction of beneficial bacteria in the gut. Eradication of these bacteria makes room for yeast and other infection-causing bacteria, spreading throughout the body and causing continuous flare-ups of disease symptoms

Other commonly used drugs include flagyl and diiodohydroxquin. Both are used to combat amoeba-caused diarrhea. The drugs can produce severe forms of hallucination and depression.

Corticosteroids, sulfa drugs, and septra are prescribed for various other conditions, all with serious side effects. They cause severe digestive disturbances, and if worsened by a nutrient-deficient diet so common among active homosexuals, they systematically destroy their bodies’ defenses against disease-causing bacteria, viruses and parasites. And so the formerly strong and healthy young men increasingly suffer from opportunistic infections which speed up aging indicators similar to those found only in old and fragile people.

Blood Transfusion

All the above mentioned risk factors cause 94 percent of all AIDS cases in the United States, a typical representative for other industrialized nations. Nevertheless, the remaining 6 percent do not seem to fall into any of the risk categories. Over half of this small percentage ‘contracted’ AIDS through blood transfusions, which to the general population would appear to be a definite indication for HIV to be the cause of AIDS.

However, a closer analysis of the AIDS survival statistics reveals that over half of all blood transfusion recipients die within the first year after transfusion. The same applies to patients who are not HIV-infected. The risk groups for failing blood transfusions are found among the very young and the very old, and those who are severely injured.

Under normal circumstances, healthy people never get a blood transfusion. They are given only to people who have already suffered from long-standing illnesses or after traumatic medical intervention, such as surgery. Anesthesia alone acts as an immune-suppressant, and the same applies to antibiotics administered after surgery to ward off infectious microbes. If a patient undergoes an organ transplant, he will receive steroids and other drugs that prevent his immune system from rejecting the new organ. Many organ recipients have to take these drugs for the rest of their lives, but since these drugs suppress overall immunity, they often die from ‘unrelated’ problems within a very short time. The treating doctors rarely attribute these deaths, though, to the side effects of the drugs, and tell the deceased’s relatives that they tried everything they could to save their loved ones. If these same problems, however, occur in HIV-positive patients, the cause of death is considered to be AIDS. Accordingly, the victims become part of the ‘statistical evidence’ that AIDS can be transmitted through blood transfusion.

In the United States, out of the 20,000 hemophiliacs, who rely on regular blood transfusions, few are diagnosed with AIDS despite the fact that over three-quarters were infected with HIV through blood supply. Mortality rates for hemophiliacs, in fact, have never been as low as they are today.

It has been proven that blood transfusions can bring up false-positive HIV test results. In a study published in the Lancet, patients showed the presence of large quantities of HIV antibodies in their blood immediately after blood transfusion, decreasing thereafter. One healthy volunteer who received six consecutive blood injections at four-day intervals tested HIV-negative after the first injection, but with each subsequent transfusion, the HIV-positive antibody response increased. The argument that HIV can be transmitted through blood transfusions may, therefore, only be partially true, if it is true at all. As the above experiment shows, blood transfusions can actually produce human retrovirus material that may be identical or similar to HIV. This certainly doesn’t mean that an AIDS disease will automatically develop because of blood transfusion (most hemophiliacs don’t develop AIDS). However, if the immune system is already severely damaged or low due to other factors, such as drug abuse or surgery, blood transfusions can greatly increase the risk of developing a life-threatening immune deficiency disease or AIDS. If blood transfusions can lead to the body producing antibodies against the HIV human retrovirus, as research has shown to be possible, it is misleading to claim HIV-contaminated blood is solely responsible for HIV infection in blood recipients.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

AIDS – A Metabolic Disorder, Not an Infectious Disease

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

For several years, it has been known that AIDS sufferers develop a drastic imbalance of very important amino acids before they actually deteriorate. A balanced protein metabolism is the main prerequisite for a healthy immune system. If the concentration of some of the amino acids in the body is too high or too low the immune system can no longer fight acute infections. This is particularly true for AIDS diseases.

The physiological imbalances related to basic protein metabolism in AIDS patients can be caused by any of the above factors, which all have highly stressful effects on the body. To combat such severe stress, the body triggers stress hormones, such as cortisone, designed to break down muscle proteins into basic amino acids needed for emergency reuse. This effectively means that the body is feeding off itself. If the stress persists, the amino acid balance can no longer be maintained, which eventually causes the collapse of the immune system so typically found in the AIDS disease.

During the process of destroying its own cells to obtain essential amino acids, the body has to deal with a large amount of cell debris, including the fragments from destroyed cell nucleus. It seems that some of these DNA or RNA fragments are labeled as the retrovirus HIV. Since there are various types of such fragments, there are also several types of HIV, i.e., HIV1, HIV2, etc. as well. This may explain why there are so many people now who are HIV-positive, but never were infected by HIV-contaminated blood or were in contact with HIV-infected people. Research by Dr. Hulda Clark, Canada, showed that babies can test HIV-positive, despite the fact that their parents are HIV-negative.

HIV is much more common than most people think. Many people who go through periods of extreme stress may have a strong presence of HIV in their blood for which their immune systems produce antibodies. Since they are unlikely to test for AIDS, they may never find out that they have encountered this virus. Even if they underwent a reliable AIDS test, they may not test positive for HIV1. However, if the test also searched for presence of antibodies for HIV3 or another of its variations, these individuals may now turn out to be HIV positive. For many years, the testing facilities in most countries could detect only one of the many HIV types. Today, a person’s blood may be screened for two types of HIV, which is still not enough to determine whether he is HIV positive or not (considering the high false-positive rates of HIV tests).

Unless the individual’s stress reaction continues, he may lead a perfectly healthy life. However, if stress-caused cellular destruction becomes a long-term issue, the amino acid balance becomes increasingly disturbed. This in turn may drain the immune system to such an extent that it can no longer defend the body against even the low-level infection-causing agents that permanently linger in everyone’s body. When the host’s immune system fails to neutralize the germs, a simple bacterium can cause a life-threatening infection, as seen among many AIDS patients.

Drug addicts, very active homosexuals, babies born to mothers with an unbalanced amino acid pool, people who are in need of a blood transfusion or had one, and those who are undernourished, starving, or are otherwise traumatized, all are suffering from an unbalanced amino acid pool and are, therefore, possible candidates for HIV particle generation.Intense stress responses cause the breakdown of cell nucleus, which results in an increased presence of DNA or RNA fragments. The first and natural response by the body is to produce antibodies to these fragments. Multiple Sclerosis, malaria, hepatitis B and C, tuberculosis, glandular fever, papilloma virus warts, and many other ailments can cause the body to make antibodies for the retrovirus p24.

If immunity becomes subdued through any major illness or constant stress, a flood of disease-causing agents begin to invade the body. Wherever the body is most vulnerable and exposed is where the AIDS disease is likely to strike first.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

The AIDS Challenge Can Become A Process Of Awakening

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz

HIV, which consists of human DNA or RNA fragments, cannot be considered to be the cause of AIDS. AIDS, which is an umbrella name for a number of different illnesses that all share a disrupted metabolism and immune system, is caused by one or several major risk factors. If a healthy person acquires HIV through an external source, i.e., through contact with HIV-infected blood or through the mother, it is rendered harmless and inactive by the host’s immune system. Such a person would have produced antibodies for HIV in his blood just as he would for any other previously encountered viral particles. He is in no greater danger of developing an AIDS disease than any other person without HIV does, as can be seen, for example, in the vast majority of HIV-infected Africans or Asians.

The destruction of the immune system

The occurrence of DNA or RNA fragments (HIV) in the blood of a person who actually produces abnormal cell destruction, on the other hand, indicates the presence of a serious immune deficiency. Malnutrition, starvation, dehydration, recurring injuries, or cell suffocation from internal congestion results in an imbalance of the body’s amino acid pool. To correct such an imbalance, the body begins to break down its own cell nuclei in order to obtain the missing amino acids. If there is a shortage of even one amino acid in the body, the percentage composition of all the other amino acids also becomes unbalanced. This can have a simultaneous catastrophic effect on the cells and their nucleus throughout the body. The destruction of cell nucleus results in DNA or RNA fragments; the fragments consist of human proteins called retrovirus. HIV is one the many retroviruses that can be generated in this way. Thus, HIV, which is generated within the body through destruction of cell nucleus, cannot be considered to be the cause of AIDS; it is an unavoidable byproduct of the body’s fight for survival. This fight may eventually lead to the destruction of the immune system, which is called AIDS.

AIDS – A Process of Awakening

Humankind is rapidly awakening to a new level of understanding that will discriminate between false and correct information. We are living in a time where scandals can no longer be concealed from the public eye. Whatever may be the truth about any subject, it will eventually dominate in collective consciousness. People will simply know from within themselves what is right and what is wrong. The AIDS phenomenon is one of today’s great challenges that can urge someone to search for the solutions to his problems within. Andrew, who was my first AIDS patient, made this realization almost instantly.

Andrew’s story

When I met Andrew 5 years ago, he was a young homosexual with fully developed AIDS symptoms. He was emotionally unbalanced, depressed and extremely sensitive. He lived in Athens, where, in his opinion, nightlife was the only thing “worth living for”. First, I motivated him to become a “day person” again. The Ayurvedic routine, cleansing procedures, improved nutrition, daily meditation, etc., soon improved the multiple lesions on his skin, steadily increased his T-cell counts, and what he felt was most remarkable, improved his appetite and digestion. With all that, his joy of living returned, but the new kind of joy was quite different to what he had ever before experienced. It was the joy of waking up, of appreciating the sun, nature, and day life, rather than clubs, drugs, and nightlife.

When I met Andrew a few years later, he was completely free of all signs of AIDS. He was used to the idea that he was still HIV positive, and with the understanding I was able to provide him with about this virus, it wasn’t even important anymore whether he had antibodies against it or not. What he knew was that he had overcome AIDS, which was most essential for his self-esteem and happiness. The stigma of HIV was no longer a matter of disgrace to him. Andrew had changed from being a victim of a disease (that didn’t exist) to a person worthy of love, appreciation and recognition. This is what AIDS can do. It can awaken a person to live with deeper sense of self-appreciation, love, dignity and purpose.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyper link back to the web page

HIV/AIDS Diagnosis – The Greatest Deception of Our Time

Posted on by

Source: www.helpforhiv.com

HIV/AIDS Diagnosis – The Greatest Deception of our Time
Learn about the grave risks that every person/parent needs to know about

LEE EVANS SPEAKS OUT ABOUT THE HIV TESTS
http://www.helpforhiv.com/levideo.html

GUINEA PIG KIDS – AIDS BBC documentary
http://www.helpforhiv.com/gpkvideo.html

DAVID CROWE SPEAKS OUT
http://www.helpforhiv.com/dcvideo.html

AIDS INC. – Trailer
http://www.helpforhiv.com/aivideo.html

 

To reprint this article, visit the source website for reprinting guidelines

The AIDS Theory Under Scrutiny

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

It was in 1980 when the first AIDS cases were diagnosed, but despite the most colossal efforts by scientists and policy makers, AIDS has remained a mystery disease. Commonly believed to be caused by HIV – Human Immune Deficiency Virus – scientists still haven’t found an antidote for the disease. To this day, there is no convincing medical knowledge as to how the pathogen HIV is supposed to cause AIDS.The current AIDS theory also falls short in predicting the kind of AIDS disease an infected person may be manifesting, and there is no accurate system to determine how long it will take for the disease to develop. The HIV/AIDS theory contains no information that can truly help identify those who are at risk of developing AIDS.

With regard to “treating” AIDS, until recently, patients were able to choose between a small number of drugs that were originally developed as cancer chemotherapies, but had to bear with extreme side effects, such as loss of hair, anemia, muscle deterioration, nausea, and other immune suppressing effects. A newly introduced cocktail of three drugs (protease inhibitors), which are less toxic than the originally used drugs, seemed promising at first in being able to suppress HIV. Yet the cumulative failure rate of the new drugs has now reached 50 percent and continues to increase as strains of HIV develop resistance to them. Already between 20 and 30 percent of patients are now infected with viruses resistant to protease inhibitors, and the situation is worsening day by day. Although the drugs have given many AIDS patients a “new lease of life” (not necessarily because the drugs suppress HIV, but because they also subdue most other disease-causing agents, at least for a while), the initial euphoria about the new AIDS treatment has died down and so has the hope of finding a cure, at least within the medical field.

The fact that there is no reliable latency period – the length of time from being infected with HIV and developing AIDS symptoms – makes it virtually impossible to predict the beginning of the disease. The first AIDS victims were told that they could expect to die within one year after infection, but today the grace period ranges from 12 to15 years, which makes immediate treatment after HIV infection dubious. This is certainly not the last revision. The majority of HIV infected people continue to be AIDS-free and only a fraction of them develop AIDS symptoms such as pneumonia, cancer of the blood, or dementia.

To add more confusion to the situation, health officials are unable to predict how many people will be afflicted with AIDS in the future, as only a small percentage of the one million HIV-infected Americans will get the disease. In the first 20 years or so of the epidemic, 95 percent of the AIDS cases were among the major health risk groups – highly active homosexuals, heroin addicts, or, in a few cases, hemophiliacs, and since then more and more heterosexual men and women are found to test HIV positive.

According to official estimates, two thirds of infected persons supposedly are in Africa, where the epidemic exploded during the 1990s, and one fifth are in Asia, where the epidemic has been growing rapidly in recent years. As of the end of 2003, an estimated 34.6 million to 42.3 million people throughout the world were living with HIV infection, and more than 20 million had died of AIDS. In that year alone, about 4.8 million people became infected with HIV, and about 2.9 million died of AIDS. However, as we shall see, these estimates are significantly flawed and manipulated.

Just four years earlier in 1999, the statistics showed figures that in no way support today’s figures. With the officially proclaimed mortality rate of 50-100 percent among HIV infected people, we should have had many more deaths in Africa where the number of infected at that time was estimated to be as large as six to eight million, and also in Haiti, where over six percent of the population tested HIV-positive. Yet during the nineties, the African continent had only 250,000 AIDS cases, and Haiti had almost none. This leads to the simple, but most important and almost forsaken question regarding AIDS, which is “What causes it?”

So far, there is no scientific evidence that AIDS is a contagious disease, although it seems to be that way to most people. What is known from recently published research is that HIV only extremely rarely spreads heterosexually and can, therefore, not be responsible for an epidemic that involves millions of AIDS victims around the world. There is also no proof to show that HIV causes AIDS. On the other hand, it is an established fact that the retrovirus HIV, which is composed of human gene fragments, is incapable of destroying human cells – yet cell destruction is the main characteristic of every AIDS disease.

Even the principal discoverer of HIV, Luc Montagnier, no longer believes that HIV is solely responsible for causing AIDS. In fact, he showed that HIV alone cannot cause AIDS. There is also increasing evidence that AIDS may be a toxicity syndrome or metabolic disorder that is caused by immunity risk factors, including heroin, sex drugs, antibiotics, commonly prescribed AIDS drugs, rectal intercourse, starvation, malnutrition and dehydration. Dozens of prominent scientists working at the forefront of the AIDS research are now openly questioning the virus hypothesis of AIDS.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

New Evidence Shows That HIV Rarely Spreads Heterosexually

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

In the developing world, the virus has existed for at least 65 years because HIV is rarely spread heterosexually. Research that studied the wives of infected hemophiliacs showed that an HIV-positive person requires over 1,000 unprotected sexual contacts with an HIV-negative person from the opposite sex to pass along the virus just once. In another surprise study, published in the Lancet, 1997, 349:851-2, French doctors at the Cochin-Port Royal hospital in Paris looked at the risk of married couples wanting to conceive a baby where the man was HIV-positive. Their findings are in line with infection rates of 1 per 1000 acts of unprotected sex among stable heterosexual couples.

According to this published research, it would take an HIV-infected heterosexual who has sexual intercourse 2-3 times a week about seven years to infect another person with HIV! This practically means that it would take the HIV-infected males of one million couples 2,739 years of daily unprotected sex to infect all female partners. In the developing world, unprotected sex among heterosexuals cannot, therefore, be held responsible for the high number of people who test HIV positive (even if HIV tests were 100% reliable, which they are not).

How is AIDS contracted?

However, the situation is different with regard to infected pregnant women. A baby is directly and constantly exposed to the mother’s blood for a period of 9 months. During this period the virus has a 50% chance of being passed on to the baby. Retroviruses survive when they reach a new host prenatally (passed from mother to child). This way of passing on a virus is at least 500 times more efficient than through sexual transmission. (Blood transfusion is another obvious way of contracting the virus)

In contrast to the situation in wealthy nations, HIV in Third World countries is equally distributed between both sexes, which means, it must have been passed on from mother to child for many centuries. Had HIV been a deadly killer virus, the babies of infected mothers would have obviously been born deformed, miscarried, or dead, because newly born babies have not yet developed adequate immunity to defend themselves against a killer virus. Even if they somehow managed to survive, they could only last for a maximum of two years – the latency period given to infected babies before developing AIDS. The spreading of the virus would have stopped automatically through the destruction of all new babies that were infected by their mothers.

Due to the low rates of homosexuality in developing countries, the prenatal route of transmission has been their only efficient way (50 percent chance) to pass on HIV to the new generations. Grown female children who become mothers would again have a 50 percent chance of passing the virus to their children. Therefore, in Africa alone, HIV must have been around for many generations before it was able to infect as many as 6-8 million people. The latest argument that the increased condom use in some African nations helped to slow the rate of infection is hardly convincing since the main route of HIV infection in Africa is from mother to child.

Who Gets AIDS?

The situation is much different in the industrialized world where HIV is mostly transmitted through different routes. The most susceptible groups are very active homosexuals, needle-sharing heroin addicts, and hemophiliacs who receive transfusions. They represent the main and easiest routes through which disease-causing microbes can be passed on to others who share one common risk factor: immune deficiency. In other words, the groups in society where HIV is commonly present amongst their members are also the groups with the biggest health risks and, therefore, more likely to produce AIDS symptoms. Still, HIV’s most concentrated occurrence among health risk groups cannot be blamed for causing AIDS diseases, just as elevated cholesterol levels cannot be held responsible for causing heart disease. These are mere correlations. Another problem is that gay men, drug users, and hemophiliacs who are exposed to semen, drugs, blood transfusions, hepatitis, the Epstein Barr virus, and many other diseases or factors known to cause biological false positives in HIV tests, represent the most unreliable groups in society to demonstrate real presence of HIV.

As prophesied 13 years ago, AIDS has invaded the heterosexual community, or so it appears. Since cervical cancer and other female diseases have more recently been renamed AIDS diseases, AIDS seems to have affected the female population. However, most AIDS patients are still male.

Anything and everything that strongly abuses the body and depletes the immune system must be held responsible for causing illness, regardless of whether it is a stroke, cancer, or an AIDS disease. Emotional stress, insufficient nutrition, dehydration, sleep deprivation, alcohol, cigarettes, antibiotics, hard drugs, excessive sexual activity, etc., can all damage the immune system. A dormant piece of viral material such as HIV, on the other hand, can do no harm in a healthy body.

Whoever continuously exposes himself to immune risk factors is also more susceptible to developing the Acquired Human Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Someone may argue: “What about an innocent baby who becomes infected with HIV by its parents and dies from pneumonia? Is that not AIDS?” The fact is that at least as many children die from pneumonia with or without HIV, and it doesn’t significantly influence the outcome of the disease whether they had a previous encounter with HIV or not. What can make a big difference, however, is how the pneumonia is treated.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page

Now Anything That Even Remotely Resembles Immune Deficiency Plus HIV Counts As An AIDS Disease

Posted on by

By Andreas Moritz 

More and more studies are being published to show that AIDS, which cannot be classified as a disease because every case displays a different combination of symptoms, occurs only in people who test HIV-positive. Before HIV was discovered, pneumonia, dementia, herpes-infections, weight loss, tuberculosis, Kaposi’s sarcoma, chronic diarrhea, several lymphomas, yeast infection, and other opportunistic infections were considered separate diseases. Depending on whether a patient had already a deficient immune system or belonged to a certain health risk group, the symptoms of these diseases exactly matched those which are now considered AIDS diseases.

Before the HIV-AIDS hypothesis, a patient who died from pneumonia, tuberculosis, or a lymphoma died from the respective causes of these diseases. By contrast, a patient who dies from pneumonia today and happens to have antibodies to HIV or p24 in his blood, is automatically labeled and listed as an AIDS victim. People with a low T-cell count in their blood are considered immune deficient, but if they continue having the same condition after testing positive for HIV, they are routinely ‘sentenced’ to AIDS, with or without clinical symptoms.

There are already over 35 such diseases now that have been renamed ‘AIDS’ in this way. One of the latest ones is cervical cancer, which has become the first AIDS disease that can only affect the female gender. This may give the false impression that AIDS is now penetrating the heterosexual community as well. The inclusion of cervical cancer as an AIDS disease has ‘increased’ the number of AIDS victims among women quite dramatically, yet at the same time, it has ‘decreased’ the number of ordinary cervical cancers among women. Overall, the mortality rate of these diseases has not changed at all. The claim that more and more heterosexuals are now afflicted with AIDS is not based on real science, but ignorance or denial of the facts.

The renaming of old diseases as AIDS further supports the hypothesis that the AIDS syndrome is never found in anyone without presence of HIV. By definition, there is no AIDS without HIV, regardless how many non-HIV people may die from the very same symptoms. Accordingly, anything that even remotely resembles immune deficiency plus HIV now counts as an AIDS disease, despite the fact that AIDS patients with Kaposi’s sarcoma have been reported to have normal immune systems.

It has been argued that wherever there is HIV, AIDS will be the consequence. However, this argument is heavily flawed. AIDS-like indigenous diseases existed long before the testing of antibodies for HIV was introduced. What is different today is that the old diseases are renamed and ‘become’ AIDS diseases whenever HIV is found to be present as well. In real terms, though, there are not any more AIDS cases with HIV in the world than there are without HIV.

——————————
This is an excerpt from my book ENDING THE AIDS MYTH

——————————
You may share or republish this article provided you clearly mention the name of Andreas Moritz and paste a hyperlink back to the web page