State Origin: The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS

GooD GrieF !
The link above this post is also non-working, as is the one of the links in the post above it ! Lets try it again with an even better link then !
The link below really shows a who's, who in all this. Robin Weiss is quite far down the page, Michael Gottlieb, the researcher from the medical center of the university of California, Los Angeles is also pictured on the below link, he is the person who started it all in 1980, Apparently, Gottlieb just got uP one morning and decided that he wanted to study the human immune system and then just began scouring the hospital for patients with immune deficiency diseases until he found one in Nov. of that year. This is the person who came to be known as the very first A.I.D.S. patient, long before any virus was ever found. The person that Gottlieb discovered was a homosexual male in his early 30's who came clean about extensive drug use, he had with a rare pneumonia (PNEUMOCYSTIS CARINII, of which just about ALL humans are infected with, usually only a problem in cancer patients who's immune system has been destroyed, by say chemo treatments) that refused to go away, a yeast infection in his throat (CANDIDIASIS) that was severly restricting his breathing, and a low T-cell count.
The technology for counting T-cell's "oddly enough" was brand new at that time, and scientists at that time knew very little in regards to what the safe proper level for T-cells actually even was.

The next several months of searching turned uP four more patients (ALL ADMITTEDLY HOMOSEXUAL DRUG USERS) for Gottlieb, who were just about all in the exact same condition as the first. They all had low T-cell counts, which was just about the only thing that Gottlieb really cared about testing. By April 81, Gottlieb decided that he had found a "NEW SYNDROME", and he knew exactly what that could mean for his carreer. About one year later from the time of Gottlieb's discovery, the first immune deficiency patient Gottlieb had found died of A.I.D.S..
"WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE !"
Jay Levy is also pictured in the below link, Levy was also given credit for being one of the first persons to have independently isolated H.I.V. in San Francisco, Levy, along with Gallo & Montagnier published the genetic sequences of their viruses in January of 85. Most lay people have never even heard of Levy, let alone ever had any idea of his accomplishment, being published along with FricK & FracK, that is.

www.houseofnumbers.com...

Robin Weiss also got busted trying to claim and use Montagnier's LAV virus after Frenchie happilly sent him a sample of it, as well. Thats right FolkS !
Gallo wasn't the only one down to lift Frenchie's bug, see what happen's to people once they start hanging-out with Gallo !
Natually, Weiss got out of it, and was never charged with theft, he made uP some smack regarding how his "DISH" must have been contaminated by the French virus, and that was that. CASE CLOSED !

reply to post by alpha68


alpha68, here are more 2 websites for your research. have you reached them yet?

www.umoja-research.com
aidsbiowar.com

I have noticed a document Boyd Graves cites, that the Washington Post rejected as "fake forgery".

Yet supposedly Graves used it in a Court hearing as Exhibit evidence?

Memorandum 46.

Talk Radio Can't Handle the Truth

By Casey Lartigue Jr. and Eliot Morgan

Sunday, August 5, 2007

In "Black Africa and the U.S. Black Movement," also known as Memorandum 46, President Jimmy Carter's national security adviser outlines a sinister 1970s government strategy to undermine black leadership in the United States and sow discord with Africans abroad.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/02/AR2007080201751.html

reply to post by jjjtir


As far as the document being fake goes, who knows ? It's a drop in the bucket compared to the document's "a" plenty that ain't.

Graves didn't need it anyway, for more that just a few reasons. "TO SAY THE VERY LEAST"

Did you ever see what went down when Graves finally did go to court ? What they said regarding "Tetrasil" ?
The whole enchilada ?
It was an absolute jOkE !

I think the P.T.B. told Graves to "Make like a tree & DISAPPEAR" !
Otherwise they were gonna really kick him in a hole.

I don't believe Graves actually "bought the farm" even for a second.

It's not like anyone could ever pick him out of a crowd, who the HeLL knows who Boyd Graves is, let alone what he actually looks like ? Besides his mother and the judge, of course.

David Ho & Fauci both, tried really hard to put Magic Johnson on the paintrain to "STIFFSVILLE", almost pulled it off to. Who's the last big celebrity that you know of to come forward saying that they were H.I.V. + after Magic ?

Montagnier most certainly has always known that H.I.V. could NEVER cause anything as complicated as A.I.D.S. without a co-factor (A HELPER), the problem with Frenchie however, is that he bounces back & forth like SuPeR BaLL on the subject. Gallo will no-longer even speak on the subject of co-factor's and H.I.V., even though he himself nominated two personally, his HTLV-1 along with a HERPES VIRUS, that of course, were both discovered by him. "BiG SuRpRisE !"

Things went south really quick regarding a co-factor being needed by H.I.V. in-order for A.I.D.S. to occur as far as Gallo was concerned after Dr. Peter Duesberg made a little remark on the subject---> "Saying H.I.V. needs a co-factor in-order to cause A.I.D.S, is no less than saying that "H.I.V. can't cause A.I.D.S., until something else does".
Needless to say...Gallo didn't care much for Dr. Duesbergs comment, from that point on it quickly
became---> "NO CO-FACTOR NEEDED, FOR H.I.V. TO CAUSE A.I.D.S.!" as far as Gallo and the rest of the retro-hack army was concerned, PERIOD ! "LeT iT bE WriTTeN ! LeT iT bE SaiD !"

Frenchie, though however, still had his own take on the subject apart from the others.

In 1986 a virologist from the "Armed Forces Institute of Pathology" named Shyh-Ching Lo reported finding a new virus in several A.I.D.S. patients.
Dr. Lo went on to grow the virus in cultured cells at the National Cancer Institute and then he infected four monkeys with it, all four monkeys went on to DIE of wasting disease within just a few months ! Guess What ?
Dr. Lo could not get his experiments published, he was turned down by over half a dozen journals. Three years later in 1989, Dr. Lo finally did get it published in a relitively obscure lesser known journal.

By that time, Dr. Lo had figured out after the years of work since the discovery of his new virus, that he had not actually been working with a virus at all !
What it actually was, is something called a "MYCOPLASMA", a tiny little bacterium that likes to hide inside of cells. Dr. Lo named his discovery "MYCOPLASMA INCOGNITUS", pointing out the fact that he had originally confused it with actually being a virus.
Lo soon began receiving applause for his discovery, well deserved at that.

When the big "A.I.D.S. Conference" came to San Francisco in 1990, Gallo could be seen pretty much glued to Montagnier, just about to the point that they looked like they were actually joined at the hip.
When Frenchie's turn came to take center stage & speak his two cents worth, he started talking >CO-FACTOR'SSHYH-CHING LO'S MYCOPLASMA ! ! !<

Gallo immediately started speaking in tongues, my virology professor had a friend of his sitting three rows back & two seats to the right from where Gallo was seated, he told my professor that everyone in the room just gasped after Montagnier made his big announcment, then everyone in the room quickly turned to see Gallo's reaction. After Gallo was revived via CPR, he simply just left, didn't even stay for the free buffet that was provided by "Mr. JessuP's ChickeN & WaFFLe HuT", totally out of character for BoB.
The whole event just shook Gallo uP something "GoD AwfuL".

Gallo didn't know that Frenchie had actually eluded to this three months eariler in the Pasteur Institute's other journal, "Research in Virology". Montagnier had noted that cultured cells infected with H.I.V., which normally died in his laboratory, grew perfectly well after he added the antibiotic TETRACYCLINE.
H.I.V. was uneffected by the treament, due to antibiotic's having no ill effects on viruses, just being able to kill bacterium. Mycoplasmas are quite notoriously known by scientists for contaminating lab cell cultures, they are very hard to detect, but contamination by them happens so offten that it's almost always looked upon as trivial.

After the conference every news channel and news paper blew-uP with the news, retro-hacks all over Hell & back all said that Frenchie stuck his neck out, but good. Gallo ripped Frenchie a new one in 1991 when he published his book, his autobiography, lol intitled - "Virus Hunting".
"HELP THE POOR FISH OUT & BUY HIS BOOK, FILLED CRAP 'A' PLENTY !"
PLEASE CALL 1-8RETRO-HACK

In Gallo's book he stated that Montagnier played dirty by telling the world about his co-factor and his actual choice of one, the way he did, as if---Gallo had any room to talk, announcing H.I.V. to the world the way he did ! Gallo stated that since 1984 there has been plenty of research (FRAUD RESEARCH, THAT IS. LOL) proving that H.I.V. & H.I.V. alone was and is, all thats ever been needed to cause A.I.D.S..

"OH YEAH ? I THINK NOT, BOB."

Frenchie quickly found out that crossing the retro-hacks wasn't such a great idea, he had papers rejected by the top journals directly after the fact. It didn't matter all that much though, due to what came next.

Shyh-Ching Lo is a very good scientist, but even so, in his excitement of believing that he made such a huge discovery, he ended uP making an even "BiGGeR" mistake.
Lo thought his mycoplasma indeed pasted whats known as "Koch's Postulates", when in-fact, it DIDN'T.
He couldn't find the bacterium in many A.I.D.S. patients, thereby falling short of the first postulate.
And the infected monkeys, while wasting away and dying, never developed anything like the W-I-D-E spectrum of A.I.D.S. dieseases nor did their conditions have a latent period. Thus, the failure to meet the third postulate also eliminated the mycoplasma from being a major player in it all. The failure of Tetracycline to cure A.I.D.S. then killed it completely.

That was also it for Dr. Luc Montagnier, he then gave up on his co-factor search altogether.
Not because he now believes as the rest of the retro-hacks do, it's more like after seeing firsthand what happens when you break ranks with the H.I.V. / A.I.D.S. establishment by becoming just another dissident thorn in their AsS, Frenchie needed, nor wanted, anymore of that.
>SO NOW, AS FAR AS FRENCHIE'S CONCERNED--->CO-FACTOR NO-LONGER NEEDED FOR H.I.V. TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY CAUSE A.I.D.S., CASE CLOSED !< Montagnier is not even interested in looking into co-factors anymore---->BoO ! ! ! HiSSSS ! ! ! !

By 1995 Montagnier was right back in-line with Gallo, Baltimore, Weiss, and all the rest, who either conveniently just forgot what they had already learned regarding H.I.V. / A.I.D.S., or just who simply refuse to go look up the work that had already been done on retroviruses starting back in the mid 50's.

When I say that Montagnier was back in line with Galo & the rest in 95, 1990 was long forgotten & forgiven by 1995, he was actually back with them before 95, but 95 was when he made his next BIG public appearance with his old chumps...OOP"S !
I mean, "CHUMS".

It was quite the event in 1995 when Frenchie, Bob Gallo and David Batltimore (THE FIRST AMERICAN A.I.D.S. CZAR) all took center stage at the "Ninth Annual Congress of Immunology" meeting in San Francisco.
None of them actually had a damn thing to say, except that "THEY HAD BUPKIS TO REPORT".
Gallo talked smack about ANTI-VIRAL gene therapy >ONE DAY "NOTHING TO REPORT ON THE VACCINCE FRONT". Montagnier's message to everyone was in keeping with the status quo, "WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT THE TREATMENTS FOR H.I.V. START IMMEDIATELY, AS SOON AS INFECTION IS KNOWN". After his "HeLL Bent" need for co-factor stand, five short years eariler, you most certainly wouldn't have expected that Dr. Luc would be suggesting quick as possible treatments with cytotoxic DNA chain terminators in good faith, because recomending chemotherapy against a virus that is not sufficient in itself to cause A.I.D.S., could be seen as uncaring & irresponsible on Frenchie's part, at least.

That was NOT good advice to be giving people, FRENCHIE.
For starter's, here's why----> Take a look at the label scientists get on their bottles of AZT, patients NEVER get to see these labels folks.

Notice- The Label Reads:
TOXIC. Toxic by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed. Target organ(s): Blood bone marrow. If you feel unwell, seek medical advice (show the label where possible). Wear suitable protective clothing.

"ABOVE IS FROM BELOW LINK" showing labels on lab bottles of ZIDOVUDINE (AZIDOTHYMIDINE) "AZT"
Also marketed under other names, this is all of them: Apo-Zidovudine, Azidothymidine, AZT, Compound S, Pranadox, Retrovir, Retrovir Injection, Retrovir-AZT, ZDV, Zidovir, Zidovudina, Zidovudinum.
When AZT was first put on the market, the cost was $10,000, for one year's worth.
benefitofarvdrugs.blogspot.com...

Many unknowing M.D'S think that "AZT" here is a wonderful drug to give to H.I.V. positives, truth is, their patients would in all actuality be better served if their doctor just shot them in the back of the head instead.

AZT is and was always, death by prescription, don't let anyone ever tell you otherwise.

Doctor's can be so stupid, most of the new ones are just about clueless.
The studies / trials on AZT were just about all RIGGED to the NINES.
So was it's approval under false pretenses.

To be continued

Two free, old MEDLINE articles on AIDS - HIV- Bovine visna-like virus (BVV) connection.

One a short letter with a proposed origin, the other is an experimental article on VISNA infecting human cell lines..

I got lead of Robert B Strecker from the first umoja-research website.

Title: AIDS VIRUS-INFECTION
Author(s): STRECKER RB
Source: JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE Volume: 79 Issue: 9 Pages: 559-560 Published: SEP 1986
Times Cited: 0

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1290475/pdf/jrsocmed00186-0071d.pdf

Aids virus infection

Sir, Is the Aids virus the only member of the Lentivirinae
family in addition to maedi-visna of sheep,
infectious anaemia virus of horses, and caperine
arthritis-encephalitis of goat1? Or is bovine visna
virus, cultured in leukaemic bone marrow in 19772,
another member of the family?
It is the gospel of the United States NIH that
the AIDS virus arose spontaneously in monkeysanimals
not commonly known to harbour visna-like
viruses or known to be adversely affected by the
AIDS virus until they are inoculated.
Most likely the AIDS virus arose by hetrodimer
recombination of bovine leukaemia virus and visna
virus in a commonly infected host cell. Furthermore,
it seems more probable that the virus expanded its
host range and perhaps replicative rate (trivialities
to those initiated in reaction rate kinetics of retrovirus
recombination) by culture growth in malignant
bone marrow tissue.
Where is the sorcerer to banish the flood created by
the apprentices of the World Health Organization
and United States National Institute of Health?
When the retrovirus strains, oncogenic genes and
transacting genes are added to the airborne human
DNA viral genomes in combination with host cell information,
we all will regret the infinitely culturable
HeLa.

ROBERT B STREcKER Preferred Risk Partners Inc
Glendale, California, USA

References
1 Seale J. AIDS virus infection: prognosis and transmision.
J. R. Soc Med 1985;78:613-4
2 Georgiades JA, Billiau A, Vanderschueren B. Infection
of human cell cultures with bovine visna virus. J Gen
Virol 1978;38:375-81

Title: INFECTION OF HUMAN CELL-CULTURES WITH BOVINE VISNA VIRUS
Author(s): GEORGIADES JA, BILLIAU A, VANDERSCHUEREN B
Source: JOURNAL OF GENERAL VIROLOGY Volume: 38 Issue: FEB Pages: 375-381 Published: 1978
Times Cited: 26

Rega Institute for Medical Research,
and Division of Human Genetics,
Department of Human Biology,
University of Leuven,
Minderbroedersstraat IO
B-3ooo Leuven, Belgium

vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/reprint/38/2/375.pdf

Another implication of our finding is that BVV may play a role in either malignant or
slow virus diseases in man. The bovine species is among those in closest contact to man:
exposure of genetically predisposed individuals may result in inapparent or latent infections.

Finally, our finding that the RdDp of BVV prefers Mg ~+ to Mn -°+ ions corroborates
existing evidence that BVV differs from BSV but is more closely related to Mason-Pfizer
monkey virus, or to sheep visna virus.

This study was supported by a grant from the Cancer Foundation of the Belgian A.S.L.K.
(Algemene Spaar- en Lijfrentekas). We thank Dr K. McCredie (University of Texas Cancer
Center, M. D. Anderson Hospital, Houston, Texas, U.S.A.) for providing the leukaemic
bone marrow specimens, Dr M. J. van der Maaten (National Animal Disease Laboratory,
Ames, Iowa, U.S.A.) for supplying BSV and BVV and reference antisera, Dr Ron Verbruggen
(Division of Human Genetics, University of Leuven, Belgium) for conjugation of
reference antisera and Dr J. J. Cassiman (Center for Human Genetics, University of Leuven,
Belgium) for helpful discussion. The technical assistance of Francine Cornette is gratefully
acknowledged. The authors thank Janine Putzeys for editorial help.

Rega Institute for Medical Research,
and Division of Human Genetics,
Department of Human Biology,
University of Leuven,
Minderbroedersstraat IO
B-3ooo Leuven, Belgium

J. A. GEORG1ADES
A. BILLIAU
B. VANDERSCHUEREN

reply to post by jjjtir


Very good info that you found there.

continued from 2 posts uP

•Reverse transcriptase is an enzyme (protein) that is unique to all retroviruses. It allows retroviruses, which are made of RNA, to copy themselves in reverse into DNA, intergrating themselves into the cells they infect.
Howard Temin & David Baltimore (NOW, BOTH RATS.) won the NOBEL PRIZE'S in 1975 for its discovery.
www.dnalc.org...

Thereza Imanishi-Kari • One of the people in David Baltimore's research group got caught by the "SECRET SERVICE" commiting FRAUD in A.I.D.S. research, but just like Gallo & many others, nothing ever came of it.
Please scroll down a bit on the below link for more on how Imanishi-Kari, along with Baltimore and how they pretty much both skated on FRAUD, don't go thinking that she was alone in it, she did it for Baltimore under his orders, he was the head of the group. It most certainly pays to know people in high places, or low places.
+ There is also a N.Y. times link on the issue below that.

en.wikipedia.org...

topics.nytimes.com...

AZT= To be CONTINUED BELOW.

Originally posted by alpha68

•Reverse transcriptase is an enzyme (protein) that is unique to all retroviruses.

False. RT is found in many bacteria, plants, and even humans.

Reverse Transcriptase

You would think a "virologist and microbiologist" would know this.

Q.= Does AZT increase T-cell production ?

A.= Yes ! It sure Does !
But so in-fact do other poisons after they are intoduced into the body, and so does extreme blood loss, due to having been in an accident. Does either one of those sound like some kind of a great trade off to you ?
When a body tissue is attacked by a toxin, or you suffer massive bleeding, the body tends to overcompensate for it by putting forth too many replacements, and it will keep doing so for as long as it possibly can until it can no-longer do so. At soom point the bodies ability to produce white blood cells is going to become way over-taxed and the T-cell count is going to collapse downward.
So, that means that the temporary increase in T-cells due to AZT & other drugs like it, most certain dosen't necessarily mean that a patient is improving by any means.
AZT was designed to cut off DNA production by inserting a blocker in the chain, it acts as a premature caboose, the cell can no-longer continue it's reproduction process due to the AZT blocker & dies trying.

AZT was said to be able to kill the virus long before it actually killed the infected cell, it was said that the amount of AZT needed to kill the virus was much less than what it would take to also kill the infected cell, it was billed as being able to attack the reverse transcriptase. NOPE ! That is complete B.S., it was also said not to be as toxic as first believed, NOPE ! It is under no uncertain terms 1000 x more toxic than last reported by Sam Broder (WHO LIED ABOUT IT) in 1986, and the "Physician's Desk Reference" to this very day still quotes AZT as having low toxicity, even though there have been over six studies since to the contrary, it has not been changed to this very day.
AZT most certainly interfers with the "reverse transcriptase" RNA to DNA process of H.I.V. just fine, in the lab dish where Broder tested it, but there is no immune system in a lab dish. In the human body H.I.V. is either inactivated by antiviral immunity,contrary to what most retro-hacks would have you believe.
You see, that a cell that has been infected by H.I.V. also has to produce it's own DNA.Every time a cell divides it must copy one hundred thousand times more DNA than that of the tiny virus, Thus giving AZT one hundred thousand chances to kill the infected cell for every chance it has to block the virus. Since retroviruses can only make DNA inside of cells making their own DNA, the drug could never attack the virus without also killing the dividing cell, no how.
In persons with anti-bodies against H.I.V. (THATS WHAT THE A.I.D.S. TEST FINDS), the virus is already in-active and not making any viral DNA at all, so AZT couldn't attack the virus anyway !
Many people already know that "CHEMOTHERAPY" is unable to distinguish a cancer cell from a regular healthy cell, well...DITTO for cells infected with H.I.V. !
AZT can't tell or decide which cells are infected by H.I.V., and which cells aren't !
Then when you consider that only one in 500 T-cells are ever even infected in antibody + persons, AZT MUST KILL 499 GOOD T-CELLS IN-ORDER TO KILL JUST ONE THAT IS INFECTED BY THE SUPER CAPE WEARING "HYPOTHETICAL" A.I.D.S. VIRUS.

It dosen't end there for AZT either folks !
Consider this as well-----> AZT not only blocks DNA production in T-cells, but also in any bacteria in the body, both good & bad. Meaning it also acts as an antibiotic, indiscriminently killing those dreaded "OPPORTUNISTIC INFECTIONS" as well as the good bacteria the body so desperately needs to digest food as well, (FOR EXAMPLE) while it destroys the immume system as sure as the day is long by wacking-out your white blood cells. That explains how AZT and other drugs like it take out those bad non-viral opportunistic infections, those effects are short lived though however.
Once AZT completely devastates the immune system, the microbes take over permanently.

Hows that for a missing "CO-FACTOR" needed by H.I.V., in-order to get the job done ?

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa


Hey ! Whats uP ?

I thought I chapped your rear end way beyond the point of you ever wanting to deal with my stupid AsS anymore ?

Other than RETROVIRUSES, what other >VIRUSES< are reverse transcriptive ?

If you were going to break your silence and chime in, I sure would have expected better timing and a much better remark than that one !

Originally posted by alpha68


Other than RETROVIRUSES, what other >VIRUSES< are reverse transcriptive ?

Hepatits B, for starters. That's sort of a big name to forget, considering it's one of the more common viral infections in the world...some virologist you are.

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa



As far as "REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE", retroviruses, and Hep-B goes, lets just say... they differ. E-mail Duesberg and ask him, or better yet, ask Gallo, since you two seem to be on the exact same page regarding it all, I believe that he would actually better serve your repeated disruptions on the topic of H.I.V. & A.I.D.S.
I'm most certainly not going to get drawn into these types of arguements with you anymore, as far as me getting turned in FOR HARASSMENT by you goes, thats quite the joke !
Because your the one who's actually keeps doing it to me, and now your right back at it.
Go nitpick someone else or just go and start another thread on a topic that you actually have a better understanding of, since your about so unadorably clueless on this subject.

Originally posted by alpha68
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

 

As far as "REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE", retroviruses, and Hep-B goes, lets just say... they differ.

Explain, please. They use the same mechanism, same proteins, and have very similar genetic code. How do they "differ"?

I believe that he would actually better serve your repeated disruptions on the topic of H.I.V. & A.I.D.S.

Asking you to prove things you are citing as "evidence" is "off topic" now? Really?

Because your the one who's actually keeps doing it to me, and now your right back at it.

Really? Was I the one who sent three, multiple-page private messages? No, I don't think I was.

Go nitpick someone else or just go and start another thread on a topic that you actually have a better understanding of, since your about so unadorably clueless on this subject.

If I'm so "clueless", please explain how these two reverse transcriptases differ. You're using that protein as some piece of evidence that HIV was engineered or couldn't be the cause of AIDS, so...explain it.

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa


What are you supposed to be again ? Don't talk to me about genetic codes, go get you an H.I.V. virus (FOR REAL THIS TIME) and any single other retrovirus (SUCH AS HTLV-1, FOR EXAMPLE) and then you tell me how H.I.V.-1 causes A.I.D.S. silly. (H.I.V.-2 DOESN'T CAUSE A.I.D.S. ANYMORE THAN H.I.V.-1 OR EVEN HTLV-1 DOES FOR THAT MATTER.)
With a masters degree in the field you claim, you should be able to figure it out for yourself.
"N-O--> P-R-O-B-L-E-M".

I'm not using that protein as anything, let alone as some piece of evidence that HIV was engineered or couldn't be the cause of AIDS.
EVERTHING ELSE I'M POSTING IS SUPPOSED TO BE POINTING OUT THE FACT THAT H.I.V. ISN'T THE CAUSE OF A.I.D.S. !

H.I.V. free A.I.D.S. = "ICL", ever heard of it ?

How does someone contract HTLV-1 leukemia, without actually even being infected with Gallo's first attempt at fraud = HTLV-1 ? He pulled it off just by naming it ! He could have named it "CAR ACCIDENT VIRUS" (CAV) and if it were to be found in anyone who died in a car accident---->BooM ! The virus is what caused it.
He could then patent the virus for a blood test kit = $$$$$$$
HTLV-1 is supposed to have a 55 YEAR (!) latent period between infection & cancer ? HELLO ? Did you read how that came to be ?
Must not of read my posts much, I'm guessing.
Same goes for cevical cancer & HPV, and Hep-B and liver cancer, no cancer is caused by those viruses, they are not able to do it, it's all a complete fraud.
H.I.V.-1 is a complete fraud, look into it yourself, you should have absolutely "NO PROBLEM" looking in a dish to see that neither H.I.V. or HTLV-1 kill cells in vitro, and like I have already said above, doing so with the background you claim to have, it should be quite easy for you to do it.

You answer regarding Hep-B & reverse transciptase is (FOR THE MOST PART) in the link you yourself posted above. Reverse transcriptase used to be known as "THE RETROVIRUS ENZYME".

You also believe H.I.V. is like flying out of ears of positives to I bet. "HIGH VIRAL LOADS / BURDENS" THats also B.S..
Your supposed to be (OR BECOME) a doctor and you don't even understand what a positive "H.I.V. test" actually means, that doesn't fair all that well for you my friend.

You said you seen Karry Mullis at Vanderbilt and someone wheeled uP with all these H.I.V. fraud research documents, and asked him why he doesn't believe them, that H.I.V. is in-fact the cause of A.I.D.S., and you actually don't know why he doesn't ?
He is only the person that invented the means for retro-hacks to actually be able to find H.I.V. in a person ! He got a NOBEL PRIZE for it. I'm sure you think he's ignorant to.

reply to post by alpha68


So, you have no way to explain why Hep B and HIV reverse transcriptase is "different"?

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa






"Sure"

The writing has been on the wall for quite some time with more than just a few M.D.s (MOSTLY OUTSIDE THE U.S.) in regards to giving H.I.V. positive patients the anti-viral drugs such as AZT or ddI ("ddI" is an antiviral drug like AZT, but it's actually even worse.), The below 1995 letter to "NATURE" edtitor John Maddox from a German Doctor just about "SayS iT aLL".

To the Editor:
As a hospital doctor I come face to face ever day with the disaster that Gallo and his colleagues have brought about. In the case of each patient with tuberculosis, each patient with herpes zoster, each patient with toxoplasmosis or cytomegalo infections, I am confronted with the thought that if these patients were H.I.V. positive, they would, as things currently stand, have to undergo anti-viral therapy. The substances availible are pure chemotheraputic agents, which means that in treating them I bring about the very illness I seek to bring under control. In effect, this means leading patients to their deaths. As a result of the A.I.D.S. virus hypothesis, things have now reached a stage where treatment of the disease itself gives rise to the bleak prognosis for the disease.

CLAUS KOEHNLEIN, M.D.
Kiel, February 28, 1995

Karry Mullis is the person who in 1993 won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for inventing whats known as the "POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION" (PCR), this incredibly sensitive technique is pretty much capable of detecting a needle in a haystack. Oddly enough, this is the actual technique needed and used by retro-hacking A.I.D.S. researchers in-order for them to be able to claim they can find the elusive A.I.D.S. virus in almost every antibody-positive patient.

nobelprize.org...

Mullis doesn't buy any of the arguements of the A.I.D.S. establishment puts forth even for minute, the retro-hacks both love & fear Mullis, they love him for his invention & fear him for his outspoken criticism of the H.I.V. / A.I.D.S hypothisis, they don't and will never have an answer to Mullis's opinions or questions on the subject.
"BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE"

"I can't find a single virologist who will give me references which show that H.I.V. is the probable cause of A.I.D.S....If you ask a virologist for information, you don't get an answer, you get fury."
Asks Mullis,
"How could a dormant virus cause fatal A.I.D.S.?
Biochemistry demands that every biochemical reaction is a consequence of an equivalent biochemical action.
How could a virus that can be seen only after a billion fold amplification be responsible for the fatal biochemical
"reactions" that kill A.I.D.S. patients ?"

Karry Mullis can go and "RUB A LAMP" in hopes of getting an answer to that one from Gallo, especially !


WoW !
I just realized that I may very well have just become to VneZonyDostupa, what the A.I.D.S. hacks are to Kerry Mullis ? Ohhh WeLL ! RighT BoB !

Originally posted by alpha68
Karry Mullis is the person who in 1993 won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for inventing whats known as the "POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION" (PCR), this incredibly sensitive technique is pretty much capable of detecting a needle in a haystack. Oddly enough, this is the actual technique needed and used by retro-hacking A.I.D.S. researchers in-order for them to be able to claim they can find the elusive A.I.D.S. virus in almost every antibody-positive patient.

The process Mullis "discovered" existed prior to his discovery. What he is credited for is finding a thermostable, cheap, and quick means of doing what scientists had previously done in a tedious and expensive manner. Mullis IMPROVED the method, not DISCOVERED it. Even the Nobel committee said this. He won the prize not because of the enormity of his discovery, but for how much his discovery would allow science to advance.

Suggesting that AIDS researchers couldn't amplify or identify DNA prior to Mullis's "discovery" is disingenuous at best and flat-out lying at worst.

As for Mullis's denial of AIDS...don't you think it a bit odd that a man who has never even been mentioned in a paper related to HIV/AIDS considers himself such an expert? He's not a physician, he's not a virologist, he's not a microbiologist, he's not even a biologist, technically. Why is his word worth any more than yours? Neither of you have credentials in the field, so you're untrained in the issues at hand. It doesn't really mean much to me when a layperson says they "think" when they can't back it up with actual science. Opinions are worth nil. I want facts. That's it.