AIDS – A Kissing Disease?

Download PDF

Is there a single “AIDS Virus,” or do all humans and animals express similar little particles under stress?

AIDS is the most well-known disease category in the world. It is diagnosed by HIV tests, which are supposed to be accurate. The tests are supposed to find a retroviral particle, “HIV,” which is supposed to be unique, and kill a subset of white blood cells called T-Cells. But, Is any of it true?

How AIDS Didn’t Become a Kissing Disease
or, Retroviruses or HERVs?
by Liam Scheff – June 2010, for OMSJ.org

retro particlesFirst things first: What are retroviruses? Answer: They are bits of your DNA that are expressed under stress. Can you tell which particles are which? (It’s hard to do). Photo Left“Electron micrographs of retroviral particles. The diameters of all the particles are approximately 100 nm. (Micrographs courtesy of Matthew Gonda.)” Source: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

(A) Type A. Intracisternal A particles in the endoplasmic reticulum.
(B) Type B. Mouse.
(C) Type C. Murine [Mouse Family] leukemia virus.
(D) Type C. Avian [Bird] leukosis virus.
(E) Type D. Mason-Pfizer Monkey virus.
(F) BLV/HTLV. Bovine [Cow] leukemia virus.
(G) Lentivirus. Bovine [Cow] immunodeficiency virus.
(H) Spumavirus. Bovine [Cow] syncytial virus.
(I) Type B. Mouse mammary tumor virus.
(J) Type C. Pseudoreplica stained with uranyl acetate.
(K) Lentivirus. [Horse] Purified cone-shaped cores of equine infectious anemia virus.
(L) Scanning electron microscopy of budding retroviral particles.

Luc Montagnier And His Budding Particles

Photo Right – Do these particles look like any of the above? All, some? Most?

These are Dr. Luc Montagnier’s 1983 pictures of “LAV.” (Science 1983) LAV means “swollen-lymph-node-associated virus.” Dr. Montagnier had stimulated cells with toxins (the common laboratory method used) to get them to produce these little budding particles. The cells belonged to a man in France who had ‘lymphadenopathy’ or ‘swollen lymph nodes.’ Because the man was gay, he was considered to be “at risk for AIDS.”

It is well-known that little budding particles just like these occur in all animal species, in healthy and unhealthy cells, in cancers, auto-immune diseases, and during pregnancy.

Dr. Montagnier could not purify (isolate and separate) these particles – they were too fragile and were not present in sufficient quantities. He wrote that they were part of the “HTLV” family. He has also claimed they were “very different” from HTLV. He did not claim that they caused any disease, only that “The role of this virus in the etiology of AIDS remains to be determined.” He sent his cell sample to Dr. Robert Gallo in the United States, who used it (or really, stole it) for another experiment.

Salivating For “HIV”

To the left are photos from a 1984 experiment (Groopman, et al) done with blood, and also saliva – that’s your mouth. These cells were also chemically stimulated and doused with toxins, which have the effect of causing cells to split, and also to form little budding particles. You can see a number of little particles budding on the surface of the central mass. What are they?

These experiments were done by researchers including Robert Gallo, who had taken Luc Montagnier’s cells and mixed them with a great many other things, including cells from at least 10 men who he considered to be ‘at risk for AIDS,’ as well as leukemia cells, and toxic stimulants. The leukemia cells were white blood cells, or T-Cells, which already contained a large volume of little budding particles of various types. Gallo called these “HTLV” viruses. He claimed these viruses caused cancer, (even though they didn’t). He then claimed to have discovered another virus in this messy mixture, which he said caused the Kaposi’s Sarcoma in AIDS patients (even though it didn’t). He named this ‘new virus’ “HTLV-III,” which was later changed to “HIV.” Gallo claimed that these ‘new’ particles killed T-Cells, (even though they didn’t). And that was the beginning of AIDS theory.

Matthew A. Gonda – Master Of The Flip-Flop

Matthew Gonda, who was a co-author with Dr. Gallo on the above virus-in-saliva paper, was the lead electron microscopist at the National Cancer Institute, whom Gallo had sent photos of his new “HTLV-III” particles to for analysis. Prior to publishing the above paper with Gallo, Dr. Gonda had returned Gallo’s photos of “HTLV-III” with the following note [Image Right]:

“I would like to point out that the “particles” in the micrograph are in debris of a degenerated cell. No other extracellular “virus-like particles” were observed… The small extracellular vesicles are at least 50% smaller than HTLV. Again these vesicles can be found in any cell pellet. I do not believe any of these particles are HTLV I, II, or III.”

Soon after, Robert Gallo held a government-led press conference, in which he proclaimed to an expectant, eager press corps that he had found the “probable cause of AIDS,” and that it was his HTLV-III. He did this before he published a single paper on HTLV-III. He had not purified HTLV-III, or demonstrated that it was anything other than one of the hundreds of little particles that buds out of cells during cancer, stress, pregnancy, illness or under toxic stimulation. But it seems the public announcement convinced Matthew Gonda to abandon his previous analysis, and jump on the money train.

AIDS – The Kissing Disease?

It should be noted that Gonda and Gallo’s picture [above] of “HTVL-III” (later called “HIV”) is in human saliva. The paper notes: “Virus was also isolated from the saliva of eight of the 18 individuals who were seropositive for HTLV-III-specific antibodies…from the saliva of four of the ARC patients and four of the healthy homosexuals.That is, if you believe any of their research at all, we carry infectious “HIV” in our mouths. Is this something we’re told by the AIDS establishment?

If the world had been shown this research, there would have been a mass panic. The headlines would have blared: “AIDS Spread by Talking, Touching, Kissing, Coughing and Sneezing!” This would have caused worldwide terror, halted all commerce, and unleashed AIDS paranoia on all the world, instead of focusing it, first, on a small subset of drug addicts and gay men, and then later on poor starving Africans.

On the other hand, if it had been publicly supported that “HTLV-III” was found in saliva, then some honest researcher would have come forward to tell the truth: “HTLV-III is no single thing, but is many different budding cells which have been stimulated out of tissue samples by harsh toxic chemicals, which are used exactly for that purpose – to cause retroviral expression. These particles are the result, not the cause, of the toxicity.”

But these pictures weren’t released, and this discussion of saliva-borne AIDS was never had, because it would have destroyed the AIDS model in its infancy. And so today we read, “HIV is not transmitted by saliva.” The “blood-and-semen-only” tactic has proven to be immensely lucrative, and has allowed massive social and political intervention in the US and abroad on many fronts. It should be clear that the science of AIDS goes only so far as it needs in order to create a political effect.

Which Of These Things Is Not Like The Other?

In 1988, a research team (O’Hara, et al) photographed cells from what they considered AIDS patients and non-AIDS patients to see who was producing ‘HIV.’ Photos Left and Right

See if you can tell the difference.

They noted that in 90% of the AIDS group, they found ‘HIV’ particles. And in 88% of the non-AIDS group, they found identical, “morphologically indistinguishable” particles.

Their conclusion:

“The presence of such particles do not, by themselves indicate infection with HIV.”

No, it’s not particles that let you know that you’re “infected,” and it’s not HIV tests, whose proteins come from these cultures, and cross-react with proteins produced by almost every disease and condition in humans (and other animals), including pregnancy.

So what does let you know that you’re “infected with HIV?” Good question.

Answer: There is no scientific answer.

Even so, all AIDS drugs are targeted at killing these small budding particles, whatever they are, and wherever they occur – in patients with no illness who test “HIV positive,” in sick patients with cancer, and in pregnant women worldwide. The result? The drugs kill cells, and seem to kill the expression of budding particles, and in killing the patient’s cells, they sooner or later kill the the patient.

Dr. Bess’s Test

In 1997, researchers (Bess, et al) tried to purify HIV. “Purify” means that they wanted to nail down the ‘infectious particle,’ which had evaded capture for so many years. Researchers had come to believe that HIV was “wily,” that it was always different, mutating constantly and drastically, but that it was also so weak and fragile that it could not be purified on its own, like all other infectious particles.

The photos from their attempt [below] to purify “HIV” show a field of broken cellular debris and micro-vesicles (parts of cells), and no purified retroviral particles.

AIDS Science Today

Twenty-five years of AIDS research have demonstrated the following: Gallo’s “HTLV-III” has no particular, reproducible size or gene sequence; the proteins that are supposed to belong to it and it alone are found in almost every human disease and condition. The “LAV/HTLV-III/HIV” proteins and gene sequences have to be cobbled together through “consensus agreement” among different labs because while fishing in beaten-up cell cultures, researches always find different things to call “HIV.”

Finally, “HIV” in any or all of its forms, has never been shown to even remotely affect T-Cells, which is the only meaningful prediction of AIDS theory. But none of this has mattered to AIDS researchers, because AIDS theory is about fear, politics and social control, and has never been about science.

You’re Full Of HERVs

HERV means “Human endogenous retrovirus,” which is what you see in the photos below, and I think, in all the previous images, too. We’re swimming in these little things. They can be induced into expression based on stress and toxicity levels.

They can also be suppressed by treatment of anti-toxins. Yes, ‘HIV’ can be suppressed by feeding cells the nutrients they need to regulated their DNA, like selenium and glutathione.

They can either stimulate cells to “induce virus,” or treat cells with nutrients to “suppress virus.” And they can do the same with patients. Go online and look up studies on “selenium and HIV,” or “selenium and cancer,” and you’ll see what a few honest researches are doing with your tax dollars. They’re figuring out how to treat illness, without killing the patient with dangerous, speculative pharmaceuticals, based on a wrong-headed attack plan.

Photo LeftHERVs in Human Placenta.

Photo Right“Budding system. (Revivified HERV). Human cells expressing structural proteins from the resurrected retrovirus, HERV-KCON, build retrovirus-like particles and release them from the cell membrane, just as cells infected with a true retrovirus do. (Credit: Image courtesy of Rockefeller University)

What’s The Solution?

As with all problems of corruption, the solution is openness, freedom of inquiry, and free and open discussion. So, talk about it. Talk about the problems with the AIDS diagnosis, and science, and the bad medicine that has grown around it – the same bad medicine that now infects all public health. From false pandemic scares to major untested vaccine drives, we’re living in an era of out-of-control and deeply corrupted public science. But we can take it back, by learning about it, talking about it, and demanding change in policy. And mostly, by sticking up for our rights to choice, freedom and informed consent in medicine, and in all things.

For more information on the problems with and solutions to the AIDS medical swindle, please visit these websites:

http://ReducetheBurden.org
http://www.OMSJ.org/
http://ARAS.ab.ca/test.html
http://VirusMyth.com
http://www.ThePerthGroup.com

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Dennis Cox says:

    This is pretty frightening stuff. If the side effects of the drugs used to treat a disease, are worse than the symptoms of the desease. Then an HIV patient who hasn’t contracted AIDS has nowhere to turn that can be trusted. And will probably live longer if he just lets the HIV run its course.

    [Reply]

  2. Shanice says:

    Interesting compilation of the many EM as well as the point(s) that you are making. Your enthusiasm and commitments are always able to show that you have been trying to constantly keep an informed pool and prompted open discussions to make sure that things get change down to its root.

    There are absolutely many fundamental views held in science that needs to be rethink and even challenged if we desire “progress” in its truest sense. The affairs with HIV-AIDS is a kind of development where theories were mistaken and even accepted as conclusion too fast before scientists are able to discern between actuality against fantasy. The cause for this complete madhouse, I guess is because there were just too much “FEAR” during the early days of the development of the disease towards the “unknown” existence of a deadly “pathogen”.

    As we know the scandal of HIV-AIDS has proved that scientific activities today are seldom carried out base on fresh, newborn ideas and inquisitive minds, rather experiments are carried out like a labor form. However, due to bold efforts from many individuals more than two decades, and sadly not without fatality of countless lives, as the production “House of Numbers” puts it, “A World Without HIV/AIDS may be closer than you think”, seems to suggest that finally the HIV-AIDS matter could be carried away from the iron-curtain.

    Though people are soon ‘opening their senses’ to the true reality of HIV-AIDS, the atmosphere within the research-health organization is still far from being revolutionized.

    My question is what next? What do u think are root issues to be addressed so that science can breath with vitality and begin to really ‘benefit’ fellow beings for all the lump sum investments science is getting.

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>