Inventing the AIDS and COVID viruses?

• With the right test, even the common cold could be blamed for a pandemic
• Millions of death certificates could switch the cause of death to a new virus without any proof
• Dr. Fauci’s claims that HIV causes AIDS were challenged by the discoverer of the genetic makeup of retroviruses like HIV, the discoverer of the PCR test he uses to diagnose HIV infections and the discoverer of the HIV virus himself!
• HIV would have to perform miracles, attacking people differently depending on where they live, to cause all 32 illnesses associated with AIDS
• Why PCR techniques cannot be used as a diagnostic test
• HIV, like coronavirus, does not make people die more quickly from the other illnesses from which they suffer

About 8,000 people die every day in the US and about 17 percent of Americans have blue eyes. Do you see where this is going? A headline could be written:

Over 1,000 new blue-eyed deaths in last 24 hours with no sign of a let-up in crisis. Those with condition asked to quarantine at home in one room

Nothing would change of course. The 600,000 annual cancer deaths would become 500,000 cancer deaths and 100,000 blue-eyed deaths (with a cancer comorbidity).  

Common cold pandemic?

Similarly, the common cold (which many times is caused by a coronavirus) could be accused of causing the largest epidemic the US has ever faced:

• more than half the population gets a cold each year
• Approximately 3 million Americans die each year
• thus, well over a million people die each year following a cold

No one will fear blue eyes or the common cold, though, as we’re all too familiar with them to believe either to be suddenly lethal. 

Formula for fear 

A seemingly frightening condition with which hundreds of Americans die each day could be reported by following this outline: 

• announce the discovery of a novel (new) virus or even just a new strand of a well known virus
• create a PCR test for the virus
• recommend enough PCR testing cycles to generate 97% false-positives so that at least 5% percent of the general population consistently tests positive
• state the daily and cumulative total deaths of people with a positive test and stories about some of the younger “victims".

The use of the word “with” is, of course, essential, since a death with a positive virus test, as opposed to a death from a virus, does not require any proof of causation; no need to demonstrate how the virus could cause cancer, heart disease or any other direct cause of death. In fact, there is no need to even show that sufficient viral load was present to cause any symptoms at all.

We’re not used to hearing about non-crime related deaths of people who aren’t famous, so we may be shocked to suddenly hear about hundreds of daily deaths. Most people don’t realize that almost 1% of the population dies each year (since we generally don’t make it to 100 years old, some 1% will die each year - a bit less when young people are overrepresented in the population). That’s a lot of deaths with which few people outside the funeral business are familiar - imagine news anchors reading 5% of the US obituaries on a nightly basis!

Manipulating statistics

The reporting on death certificates following the identification of the “new” virus would look like this:

Direct cause of deathPCR test result for new virusCause of death1.pneumonia positive new viruspneumonia negativepneumonia 2. influenza positive new virusinfluenza negativeinfluenza 3. heart diseasepositive new virusheart diseasenegativeheart disease

So blaming an innocent virus for hundreds of thousands of deaths by simply changing the death certficate could be done, but has it?

HIV-AIDS hypothesis challenged - Retrovirus pioneer vs. Fauci

According to one of the world’s leading virologists, University of California, Berkeley Professor Peter Duesberg, a harmless virus has already been blamed for an epidemic by none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci himself back in the 1980s. This was not a challenge that could be easily written off; Dr. Duesberg won international acclaim in the 1970s for his groundbreaking cancer research, was one of the youngest scientists ever elected to the National Academy of Sciences and served as a scholar-in-residence at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) laboratories. As the Sunday Times reported,

As the first scientist to map the genetic structure common to all retroviruses, of which HIV is one, he knew that mice and chickens, for example, contain 50 to 100 retroviruses that never cause disease. He knew that if you look hard enough, "when you're in the retrovirus business you can detect a retrovirus". But attempts to prove that the viruses cause disease have uniformly failed.

In layman's terms, the scientist who knew more about retroviruses like HIV than anyone alive said, “Destroying an immune system is not something a retrovirus can do according to everything we know. Prove me wrong, Dr. Fauci.”

No such proof was forthcoming. So Dr. Duesberg published, Inventing the AIDS Virus, and “underscored the confidence of his HIV skepticism by offering to be injected with HIV-tainted blood,” explaining, 

The war on AIDS … has been fought in the name of the virus-AIDS hypothesis, which holds that HIV, the AIDS virus, is a new cause of thirty old diseases, including Kaposi's sarcoma, tuberculosis, dementia, pneumonia, weight loss, diarrhea, leukemia, and twenty-three others (see chapter 6). 

If any of these previously known diseases now occurs in a patient who has antibodies against HIV (but rarely ever any HIV), then his or her disease is diagnosed as AIDS and is blamed on HIV. If the same disease occurs in a patient without HIV-antibodies, his or her disease is diagnosed by its old name and blamed on conventional chemical or microbial causes. The following examples illustrate this point:

1.Kaposi's sarcoma + HIV-antibody = AIDS

Kaposi's sarcoma - HIV-antibody = Kaposi's sarcoma

2. Tuberculosis + HIV-antibody = AIDS

Tuberculosis - HIV-antibody =Tuberculosis

3. Dementia + HIV-antibody = AIDS

Dementia - HIV-antibody = Dementia

Extraordinary abilities of HIV?

Assuming a virus like HIV could be deadly and is the current cause of previously known illnesses, can it cause different illnesses in different parts of the world? Thankfully, such terrifying capabilities have not been observed in properly controlled tests, leading to this observation by Professor Duesberg:

HIV would need to perform other miracles to cause AIDS. Virtually all diagnoses of Kaposi's sarcoma are made in homosexuals, not in the other AIDS risk groups. Intravenous drug addicts disproportionately suffer from tuberculosis, Haitians from toxoplasmosis, and hemophiliacs from pneumonias. African AIDS diseases are basically different, manifesting as tuberculosis, fever, diarrhea, and a slim disease, unlike our wasting syndrome. 

A homosexual with HIV who may develop Kaposi's sarcoma can donate blood for a hemophiliac. But no hemophiliac has ever developed Kaposi's sarcoma from a blood transfusion. Instead he is more likely to develop pneumonia, if he contracts anything at all. Only HIV is common to both victims. No virus could possibly make such distinctions between its hosts. 

A more likely hypothesis would blame the health risks specific to each group for their different diseases. If the same diseases can be found on the rise in the same risk groups, but also in people without HIV, then the virus would appear to be a harmless passenger.

No synergy with HIV

Public health officials justified including deaths with HIV as HIV deaths by claiming that HIV caused or worsened an already existing comorbidity.  If that were the case, we would expect to see a difference in disease progression when HIV is present. But that is not the case, as Professor Duesberg explained:

According to a Ugandan doctor treating AIDS cases, “A patient who has TB and is HIV-positive would appear exactly the same as a patient who has TB and is HIV-negative. Clinically, both patients would present with prolonged fever; both patients would present with loss of weight, massive loss of weight, actually; both patients would present with a prolonged cough, and in both cases the cough would equally be productive. Now, therefore, clinically I cannot differentiate the two.”

No synergy with COVID

Likewise, public health officials justify listing deaths with coronavirus as deaths from coronavirus by claiming that coronavirus may worsen an already existing comorbidity. If that were the case, we would expect the average age of COVID deaths to be lower than that of the general population, since the coronavirus would be speeding the demise of patients who would otherwise live longer even with their comorbidities. 

That is not the case. The average age of death from coronavirus in the US is 80, which is  higher than the 74 year average age of death in the US and is even higher than the 79-year life expectancy of babies born in the US this year.

PCR creator vs. Fauci

Duesberg’s book features a foreword by the late Dr. Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for inventing the very PCR technique used by Fauci to implicate HIV in the AIDS epidemic. Dr. Mullis ended his foreword with this admonishment, “We know that to err is human, but the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is one hell of a mistake. I say this rather strongly as a warning. Duesberg has been saying it for a long time. Read this book.”

Duesberg lays out the very justified attack on Fauci’s hypothesis:

The very ability of retroviruses to survive as dormant genes by attaching themselves to human chromosomes has been exploited for the most sensitive HIV assay yet-the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). This incredibly sensitive technique … is a technology that amplifies even the tiniest amounts of any specific DNA sequence, creating enough copies of the desired sequence for detection and analysis. 
This amounts to finding the proverbial needle of dormant HIV in a haystack of human DNA. But contrary to statements by some HIV scientists, this is not an isolation of the actual virus and does not fulfill Koch's second postulate. It is only the detection of dormant DNA genomes, or fractions of viral genomes, left behind from infections that occurred years earlier. 

Nevertheless, scientists and journalists alike sometimes mislabel such exhumations of viral fossils as "new, more sensitive techniques" that somehow prove HIV can be found in an ever-greater portion of AIDS patients. Because a few HIV molecules are technically invisible but millions of HIV molecules are visible, Mullis's PCR technique has become the only practical method to detect viral molecules in all those antibody-positive people in which no virus can be found.” 

In Mullis’ own words:

With PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody. Because if you can amplify one single molecule up to something that you can really measure, which PCR can do, then there’s just very few molecules that you don’t have at least one single one of them in your body. So that could be thought of as a misuse of it, just to claim that it’s meaningful.

In a video interview, Mullis discussed Fauci personally:

Those guys have got an agenda. Which is not, what we would like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way … and they smugly – like Tony Fauci, does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his salary and lie directly into the camera.

HIV discoverer vs. Fauci

What could be a bigger embarrassment for Fauci than having his AIDS-HIV retrovirus theory discredited by the inventor of the PCR test he relies upon (Mullis) and by the discoverer of the genetic structure of retroviruses (Duesberg)? Being discredited by the discoverer of the supposedly guilty HIV virus itself!

The recently deceased Pasteur Institute researcher and professor Luc Montagnier, who won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), declared at the San Francisco International AIDS Conference in June 1990, that “the HIV virus is harmless and passive, a benign virus.”

Check in daily for the continuation of our series on AIDS and COVID to see the answers to these crucial questions and more:

1. Did NIH scientists commit scientific fraud in claiming to have discovered the HIV virus in an AIDS patient?
2. Why are there thousands of AIDS patients without HIV?
3. Did Fauci suppress evidence that HIV does not cause AIDS?
4. Did Fauci blacklist the scientists challenging him on AIDS?
5. What does cause the breakdown of the immune system in AIDS patients, if not a virus?
6. Was the AIDS treatment prescribed by Fauci unnecessary, ineffective, painful and deadly, as his critics claim?
7. How many times have public health officials recently blamed viruses for diseases that turned out to not be caused by any pathogen at all?
8. Was AIDS a trial run for COVID?
9. How is the AIDS-HIV controversy still mostly unknown to Americans after over 1 million sales of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s #1 Amazon bestseller,  The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, in which “nearly half the text—some 200 pages—was devoted to presenting and promoting the astonishing claim that everything we have been told about HIV/AIDS for more than 35 years probably constituted a hoax"?