HIV Antiretroviral Drugs

In a previous record I raised questioned if the Hiv virus causes Aids. In this record I do more of the same because the more I look at the whole Aids issue the more a lot of the mainstream conclusions do not make sense. Coupled with the mountain of evidence from the scientific society named the 'Hiv dissidents' It is essential for the sake of humanity, we need to re-examine the facts with regard to the most dreaded disease facing the world.

The Aids dogma and its grip on the social consciousness

Drugs For Hiv

A known campaign program has been unleashed on the public. We are made to believe that the Hiv virus is deadly and can cause the whole immune principles to collapse, that once infected death by Aids is certain. There are anti viral drugs such as A.Z.T , D.D. C and D.D.I that is said to slow the progression of the disease but they are very toxic and can well bring the unset of Aids itself.

Below are some essential questions that needs urgent answers

First, after spending billions of dollars, H.I.V. Researchers are still unable to justify how the H.I.V., a retrovirus with a very simple genetic organization, damages the whole immune system, and there seems to be no means to stop it. The present stalemate contrasts dramatically with the belief expressed in 1984 by Dr Gallo-the chief architect of the Hiv-Aids hypothesis and the then Secretary of health Margaret Heckler announced the probable cause of Aids has been discovered, At that time Gallo opinion the virus killed cells directly by infecting them, and the U.S. Government officials improbable a vaccine would be ready in two years. Twenty five years on, no vaccine is in sight, and the certainty about how the virus destroys the immune principles is yet to be resolved. Could we be barking up the wrong tree?

Second, Over 4,000 scientists along with two Nobel peace prize winners, eminent virologist and immunologist query the Hiv/Aids hypothesis. Why hasn't their findings made social if truly we are finding for answers?

Third, predictions based on the H.I.V. Epidemic principles have failed spectacularly. For instance, Aids in the United States and Europe has not spread straight through to the normal population. Instead, twenty five years on, it still remains almost entirely confined to the former risk groups-mainly sexually promiscuous gay men, homophiliacs and intravenous drug abusers. The H.I.V infection rate among Americans has increased more slowly rather than increasing rapidly as predicted, which suggests that at best H.I.V. Is an old virus that has been with us for hundreds of years without causing an epidemic.

Fourth, a new size into diagnosis has entered into healing custom with Aids, where a person with a distinct type of symptoms is said to have a disease. Aids without H.I.V. Is especially prevalent in Africa, where being H.I.V.-positive is not even a factor in diagnosis. The definition of Aids in Africa is fundamentally distinct than the definition of Aids that is used in the West. If an African is diagnosed with the following clinical symptoms-a persistent cough, a high fever, persisting diarrhea, a ten-percent weight loss in the last two months-and lives in Africa that person has Aids, irrespective of any other possible disease such as dysentery, malaria or T.B. Never the less, Western scientists claim that 85 percent of the African citizen is distinct for H.I.V anti bodies, when tests are rarely, if ever, performed. How can they make such conclusions?

Lastly, Hiv-Aids has the hallmarks of a disease that most terrorises the minds of citizen with whom it affects their way of life. Since we are told that Hiv the virus that causes Aids can be spread by sexual intercourse- an performance most adults find very pleasurable, it has thus made the social write back in a manner quite unlike any other disease. However, that doesn't quite hold up. There is, in fact, no preserve for the idea that Aids is a sexually transmitted disease in any place in the world. For example-people who are diagnosed as having Aids but whose partners remain uninfected. There are thousands of these. One of the most paramount examples is Arthur Ashe. He had H.I.V. For ten years and died of Aids, but his wife and daughter are both H.I.V.-negative.... There are 15,000 American haemophiliacs who are H.I.V-positive, and there isn't one study that shows that the wives of haemophiliacs get Aids from their partners. Why is this so?

So many unanswered questions but we must seek answers to them. Agreeing Albert Einstein the most scientist of the last century, ''the prominent thing is never stop questioning''
Is there a possibility that all things we opinion about Aids is wrong? Agreeing to Neville Hodgkinson of the Sunday Times London, wrote an record on April 26th 1992 stating ''If Hiv does not cause Aids....then we will have witnessed the biggest healing and scientific blunder of this century. I cannot agree with him more.

Related : hiv antiretroviral drugs