Tag Archives: HIV tests

The Complete HIV Breakdown with Dr. Rashid Buttar, Robert Scott Bell and Liam Scheff

Incredible show today with Robert Scott Bell and Dr. Rashid Buttar.

Please download and listen to the bonus segment, as Dr. Rashid Buttar, RSB and Liam take apart, for good and all, the HIV myth. No sugar. It’s a great show.

How many needle-pricks from “HIV” patients can a person have an not be “Positive?” How often can you have sex with “HIV” positive people and not turn “positive”

Answer: As many as you’d like, because there is no HIV. There are only HIV tests…

The first hour of the interview will be available here in archives for Aug 20th:

Here’s the 40 minutes of bonus “HIV” breakdown. We even talk Kim Cools and Umlingo Wamangcolosi!

Screwing More HIV Positives is Good For You, Says AIDS Establishment (Or, What to Wear When the Mainstream Commits Suicide)

RTB: We don’t even begin to know what to do when the mainstream begins to openly commit public suicide, but cheer.

From PLoS Pathogens, and a cancer research group in Seattle, we now have the following theory:

Have sex with as many HIV positives as possible, to protect you from…yes, that’s right. HIV.

No, you don’t misunderstand. This is what they’re saying:

“Women who have been infected by two different strains of HIV from two different sexual partners – a condition known as HIV superinfection – have more potent antibody responses that block the replication of the virus compared to women who’ve only been infected once.”

Yes. Get “infected” over and over again. Yes, that is what they’re saying. Because the whole thing is a Sham, and always has been.

Do you need them to spell it out for you? They’ve been lying to you for 30 years.

“The study suggests that harboring a mixture of different viral strains may be one way to promote a robust antibody response. The findings also suggest that being infected with two different HIV strains not only leads to a strong response, but also a more rapid response that is capable of recognizing many other HIV strains. “

Yup. So, if you’re going to screw, screw twice. And then you’ll be protected. By antibodies. To something that doesn’t exist.

Hey Anthony Fauci, please, go screw yourself, maybe that will help you become less of a eugenicist.

(Fauci is head of NIH and has destroyed millions of lives worldwide with criminally fraudulent HIV tests, and he’s just one of hundreds of bogus researchers stealing tax money to murder people, with their ignorant ‘consent’ of course.)

Back to the funny papers. I personally have got to get to the “HIV” clinic and find at LEAST two people to have sex with. Because then I’ll be protected. From HIV.

The original article:

SEATTLE – Women who have been infected by two different strains of HIV from two different sexual partners – a condition known as HIV superinfection – have more potent antibody responses that block the replication of the virus compared to women who’ve only been infected once. These findings, by researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, are published online March 29 in PLoS Pathogens.

“We found that women who had been infected twice not only had more potent antibody responses, but some of these women had ‘elite’ antibody activity, meaning that they had a broad and potent ability to neutralize a wide variety of strains of HIV over a sustained period time,” said senior author Julie Overbaugh, Ph.D., a member of the Hutchinson Center’s Human Biology Division. It is estimated that only about 1 percent of people with HIV are so-called “elite neutralizers” who are able to potently neutralize multiple subtypes of the virus.

“Individuals who become superinfected with a second virus from a different partner represent a unique opportunity for studying the antibody response and may provide insights into the process of developing broad neutralizing antibodies that could inform HIV-vaccine design,” she said.

The study suggests that harboring a mixture of different viral strains may be one way to promote a robust antibody response. The findings also suggest that being infected with two different HIV strains not only leads to a strong response, but also a more rapid response that is capable of recognizing many other HIV strains.

The researchers tracked the immune activity of 12 superinfected women from Mombasa, Kenya, over a five-year period and compared each to a control group of three singly infected women. Overbaugh and lead author Valerie Cortez, a doctoral student in her lab, assessed the ability of antibodies present in superinfected and singly infected women to neutralize a spectrum of circulating HIV-1 variants. In doing so they were able to determine whether the presence of two viruses compared to one made a difference in immune response. The researchers controlled for variables such as antibody response prior to superinfection and biomarkers of immunity such as CD4+ T cell count and viral load.

The study found that superinfected women had, on average, 1.68 times more neutralizing antibodies than non-superinfected women, and they scored much higher in their ability to neutralize the virus – superinfected women had 1.46 times greater potency than the singly infected women.

More than 1.1 million Americans are estimated to be living with HIV today, and every nine-and-a-half minutes someone in the U.S. becomes infected, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. An HIV vaccine is considered the best approach to long-term protection from HIV infection, but attempts to develop such a vaccine so far have meet with limited success.

“The holy grail of an HIV vaccine is to elicit antibodies to the virus because antibodies have been shown to block virus infection. But there has been little progress in determining how to elicit such antibodies with a vaccine. The study of individuals HIV infected who have developed strong antibody responses to the virus may shed light on the best approach to design a vaccine that will induce an effective immune response,” Overbaugh said. http://www.eurekalert.org/

You heard the man; go get screwing.

Oh, you can contact them, if you want to point out how broken their paradigm is:

Contact: Kristen Woodward

kwoodwar@fhcrc.org

206-667-5095

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center

Study finds HIV ‘superinfection’ boosts immune response

Findings may provide insight into HIV-vaccine development

Return Your HIV Diagnosis Now

RTB: The OMSJ has made it easy for you to turn in your false HIV diagnosis. Please read their article on “Erasing HIV’s Scarlet Letter,” and download the “Differential Diagnosis” forms, linked at OMSJ.org and below.

Erasing HIV’s “SCARLET LETTER” [Link]

1. Your first letter reminds your doctor who you are.  It should contain short questions about a) the tests he used, b) how the diagnosis was made, and c) the kind of response you seek.

If you are asked to come in for a visit, do so – and bring a recording device.  During your visit, turn it on and lay it in plain sight so that both sides will know that the conversation is being recorded.

In some states and countries, it is illegal to secretly record someone.  If the device is sitting in the open, it should not violate any laws.  If you’re not sure, turn it on and say clearly that you are recording your conversation “because what they will say is important and you don’t want to misunderstand anything they’ve said.”  If they refuse, leave the recorder on and re-state that they want the recording device off.  Then leave the clinic, go home and write another letter.

If the doctor happens to respond in writing and identifies the test used, you’ll probably find the test in this list.  If he doesn’t identify it, pick one test, and ask if he used that test.  Mail your certified letter.

Your follow-up letters should ask exactly how he conducted his diagnosis.  He should explain exactly how he ruled out each of the 100+ conditions that are known to “cross-react” to HIV tests – conditions that include flu, tetanus and hepatitis shots, pregnancy, colds, the flu, physical injuries, and so forth.  Your doctor should be able to list ALL OF THE KNOWN CROSS-REACTIONS and explain exactly how he ruled out each one.  If he fails to answer this simple test, it suggests that he did not conduct a competent diagnosis.

Just as a policeman must rule out gunshot wounds, stoke, diabetic shock or other ailments before arresting someone for drunk driving, your doctor must identify and all of the known conditions that cause false positive test results and explain exactly how he ruled them out.

Your objective is to pin down the doctor.  Don’t let him play “hide the penny” with you.

Once you’re satisfied that your first letter and follow-up questions have been answered, move to second letter.

2. Your second letter addresses questions about your CD4 count and flow cytometry.

This is important because the CDC has used a CD4 count of under 200 to identify AIDS cases.  Unless the doctor can describe exactly how the test was conducted, you must assume that the test used was improperly calibrated, was recalled, or was conducted by a lab tech who didn’t know what he was doing.  The fact that both Lab Corp and Quest Diagnostics paid multi-million dollar fines to settle felony complaints should be enough to ask many follow-up questions.

3. Your third letter can ask for a complete list of all of the pharmaceutical reps who visited his clinic in the past decade and how much money, free trips, speaking fees and other payment he received from the drug industry.

4. Use this letter if you are asked to return to the clinic for additional testing.

Because all HIV tests are inaccurate, unreliable and presumptive, taking one or a thousand tests is as unreliable as using one or a thousand broken clocks to verify the time.  Pin down the clinician on the tests that you’ve already taken before wasting your time with new tests.

5. Use this letter and this list to write each of your next letters.

For example, ask him how he ruled out Herpes simplex, and if he knew that the virus is known to cross-react with HIV tests.

Except for the first letter, the rest can be modified and sent in any order.  At some point, ask for copies of all of your medical records.  If a criminal complaint is ever filed against you, these letters and medical records will likely come in handy.  More likely than not, securing the records early will prevent someone from making changes when you start asking them embarrassing questions.

Use the comments section of this report for questions as a FAQ.

 

Breaking News: HIV Tests Do Not Hold Up In Military Court

RTB: We’ve seen HIV tests fall apart under scrutiny in court – now we see it in military court, with thanks to the OMSJ.

by OMSJ

“Because the case law surrounding HIV was mostly developed at the height of the HIV/AIDS scare 20 years ago, the government’s evidence is usually filled with gaps because it relies upon a variety of assumptions.  But the military’s current procedures for supposedly diagnosing people as HIV positive is scientifically, medically, and legally inadequate.”

– Eldon Beck, Captain, USMC, 24 Oct 2011

Two weeks after the Marine Corps dismissed all charges against Corporal RL, his attorney posted this report on the Marine Corps’ Defense Services Organization’s website.  These reports are seen by all Marine attorneys worldwide, and its contents will likely be reviewed by all other DoD and military branches.

Captain Beck left no question about OMSJ’s impact in the case:

“Our success in challenging the HIV issues in our case is largely due to Clark Baker (a former Marine, retired LAPD investigator, and licensed CA PI), Baron Coleman (a young civilian lawyer with expertise challenging HIV prosecutions), and other members of Clark’s team at the Office of Medical and Scientific Justice (OMSJ). Without them, we would not have been able to effectively challenge the HIV testing, chain of custody, and alleged diagnosis of our client…  You should contact (OMSJ) immediately if you are detailed to an HIV-related case.”

Because of the incompetence that exists within HIV clinics, hospitals and the NIH and CDC, OMSJ is not concerned about sharing it’s investigative strategy with prosecutors or alleged “HIV experts” who are called to testify as prosecution witnesses.  In fact, if prosecutors and their witnesses memorize OMSJ’s strategy, they would not file criminal HIV charges against anyone.

Capt. Beck concludes:

“(A)n HIV case is NOT a slam dunk for the government.   Get the right HIV experts on your team and you will probably be able to kill the case before trial.  If the government is reckless enough to go to trial, you will probably be able to get a strong win for your client.”

Capt. Beck’s complete summary is posted here.

Breaking News: HIV Tests Do Not Hold Up In Court

RTB: The OMSJ has gotten over thirty defendants liberated from their “HIV” indictments – by bringing the facts to court, and holding the “experts” to simple honesty and logic.

Step 1: Does anyone “have” HIV? Answer: “No, not based on HIV tests.”

The reality is this – there are no tests for HIV in existence, despite the massive propaganda peddled by the pharmawhores in media and medicine. There are …no tests that find a single, unique particle; these garbage tests react with every disease known to human kind.

When this resilient, repeated, incredibly well-documented and sustained evidence is to be presented at court, the prosecutors buckle, and offer lesser ‘plea agreements,’ so the humiliating and shameful reality of the HIV fraud isn’t paraded before a judge or jury.

In this case, Jason Young would have spent 70 years – the rest of his life – in prison, for being falsely accused of being “HIV positive.” Instead, he’ll walk out of prison in a couple of months. [Link]

HIV testing is an absolute fraud, and an absolute lie. If you know anyone who has been falsely condemned with one of these abysmal tests, please have them contact the OMSJ.

http://www.omsj.org/contact-us
http://www.omsj.org/innocence-group
http://www.omsj.org/corruption/omsj-prevails-in-another-hiv-case

Did You Know That HIV Tests Come Up Positive For HIV Test Components?

by Liam Scheff

Greetings Class;

Please take your seats. Michael, please stop bothering Cynthia. Susan, please stop showing your bottom to everyone.

Today, we’re going to review antibody testing for HIV, a reckless process used in the dark ages of medicine, in the late 20th and early 21st Century.

Let’s begin with handout A:

As you look for the term “cows, goats, babies”you will find a medical article on a ‘false positive’ in a baby humanoid. You will note that “heterophile” antibodies have caused this HIV test to be determined as “positive,” because of a reaction with cow and goat proteins:

“Heterophile antibodies are a well-recognized cause of erroneous results in immunoassays. We describe here a 22-month-old child with heterophile antibodies reactive with bovine [Cow] serum albumin and caprine [Goat] proteins causing false-positive results to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and other infectious serology testing.”

Yes, Cynthia? Yes, Cows. The kind that moo. Continue reading Did You Know That HIV Tests Come Up Positive For HIV Test Components?

House of Numbers Update – Now Available on iTunes

Get your piping hot download of “House of Numbers,” the award-winning ass-kicking documentary by Brent Leung that takes on the corrupt AIDS medical establishment and shows ’em what for…

Download iTunes Here. | Open iTunes Here.

And get ready for the expanded, all-you-can-eat DVD release, with 32 featurettes not seen in theaters, including hours of exclusive interviews, bonus research material – PLUS flying monkeys!! (Or maybe not flying monkeys, but yes to everything else – see the complete description at House of Numbers.com).

Does AIDS Cause HIV?

by Liam Scheff for OMSJ.org

How we’ve gotten AIDS wrong for 25 years, and how to fix it…

Those ‘in the know,’ who read and scour and search the medical literature on AIDS and HIV testing, are well aware that neither of these belief systems works according to their promised plan. Here’s how it was supposed to go:

A single unique particle, (originally called LAV, then HTLV-III, then rechristened HIV) gets into the body via semen or blood exchange; it gravitates somehow to the white blood cells called T-Cells; it opens the cell door, somehow, and copies itself into the genome, using an enzyme called Reverse Transcriptase. These cells are then impaired, and die, supposedly. This weakens the body over time and other illnesses occur.

That’s the official narrative. But only more or less, because there are so many alterations and versions of the official story at this point that it’s hard to keep up. “Maybe cells aren’t killed directly, maybe latent infection is really active, maybe constant exposure causes immunity…” The official story has caused nothing but headaches and trauma for the mainstream, as it’s never held together, and no part of it is ably demonstrated or proven. In fact, most aspects of the story are countered by observation.

That is, there is no unique, purified, isolated, gold standard particle called “LAV,” or “HTLV-III,” or “HIV.” There are many divergent proteins that are grabbed out of blood samples through antibody testing, and a far greater number of genetic threads, copied out of cell cultures by a touchy, highly sensitive technology called PCR. All of these are supposed to be “HIV.”

This wild diversity of fragments gave CDC cop and New York Times pharma-shill Lawrence Altman the impetus to coin his second-most famous line: “HIV, the wily retrovirus.” (His first is “The virus that causes AIDS.“)

And right there you have the second major problem. AIDS is about, well, if I said 10,000 diseases, I’d be in the ballpark. It is a disease category as long as Pinocchio’s nose, and as deep as a the Grand Canyon. It grows at will, and can never be filled up – it grows and goes. Any disease can be called “AIDS” if it occurs in people who the medical cops think are “at risk for AIDS.”

HIV Profiling

That’s how it works – literally. You have a fungal toenail? Get treatment. You’re in a “risk group?” (Gay, black, drug-addict, or poor). Then, “It could be AIDS! Better get tested.” Otherwise, you’re just another shlub who drinks too much and has bad hygiene, so take an anti-fungal drug, and soak it in Epsom salts or some other concoction. But if you’re a gay male, you’re “at risk for AIDS,” so you get an HIV test. And then you’re in the stream – HIV death sentence, AIDS drugs, support groups, red ribbons, pharma bills, major side-effects and early (but sanctified) death.

You have a recurring sore throat, and you’re a black woman in the inner city ghetto? “Could be AIDS! Better get tested.” If you’re a straight white college girl or boy, you’ll be told to eat less sugar, that you could have weakened immunity, or Chronic Fatigue, or Epstein-Barr or Guillain–Barré Syndrome, or some other concoction of non-specific symptoms given a three-name moniker.

The mainstream has just about crucified itself revealing that it has no good solution to the ‘how does HIV cause AIDS’ question, when you put them on a pin, or under the spotlight. When they’re feeling particularly honest and generous, they’ll tell you that “There’s a great deal to be known that we do not already know,” and “the specific mechanisms remain elusive,” and, “It will require increased funding and may take years to solve this perplexing riddle,” and so on.

Meanwhile, when making public policy, they’re absolutely sure of it, and don’t wait to tell everyone in the world that HIV is a single particle which is the cause of a single disease, and so everyone (in a risk group) must be tested (meaning, in all practical senses, “The ghetto can line up here for testing, but walk away, wealthy people, walk away!”)

Read the Rest of This Article

In Defence of AIDS Critics – New Article in the Gay and Lesbian Humanist

RTB: Veteran in the AIDS War, John Lauritsen, writes a strong piece in this month’s G&L Humanist:

Here, the AIDS dissident John Lauritsen looks at one piece of ridicule in particular, and questions why he was not allowed to write a reasoned reply in a British humanist publication.

Profits of the “AIDS industry” run into many billions of dollars every year. When AIDS dissidents speak up, they are ridiculed with often ad hominem arguments. Here, the AIDS dissident John Lauritsen looks at one piece of ridicule in particular, and questions why he was not allowed to write a reasoned reply in a British humanist publication.

According to the German philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860), “All truth passes through three stages: first, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” I’d add that, even before ridicule, truth will be ignored or censored, especially if powerful political-economic interests are involved. There is a German word for this: Todschweigen (to kill off through silence).

For over a quarter of a century there have been critics of the orthodox AIDS paradigm, the HIV-causes-AIDS hypothesis. We call ourselves “AIDS dissidents” or “AIDS critics” or “AIDS realists”. We have experienced every imaginable form of censorship and ridicule, and now, as our ranks have grown, violent opposition, which almost always attacks our persons, not our ideas.

Dr Mark Wainberg, president of the International AIDS Society, has called for jailing AIDS dissidents, whom he calls “HIV deniers” (his explicit analogy to “Holocaust deniers”). John P Moore of Cornell University advocates even more violent measures, stating, “This is a war, there are no rules, and we will crush you, one at a time, completely and utterly (at least the more influential ones; foot-soldiers like you aren’t worth bothering with).” (Letter from John P Moore, PhD to AIDS dissident Michael Geiger, 27 January 2007.)

[…]

Conspiracies do exist

Of course, conspiracies do exist. In business or in politics, they are part of the game. While denying the conspiracies in which we AIDS critics allegedly believe, Kalichman seems to believe that we ourselves form some sort of conspiracy. Using stealth tactics and the pseudonym of “Joseph (Joe) C Newton” to penetrate our ranks, he ingratiated himself with some of us (not me), professing to greatly admire our work. This was pointless, as we have nothing to hide and our ideas are readily available. Kalichman seems particularly proud of his incognito relationship with Peter Duesberg: on Page 27 of his book is a photo of himself next to Duesberg.

[RTB – see “Will the Real Seth Kalichman Please Stand Up?“]

The ugliest ad hominem tactic used by Kalichman and others of his ilk is to gloat over the deaths of a few AIDS dissidents, arguing speciously that their deaths were caused by HIV, and they would have lived longer had they taken “anti-HIV” drugs. Without going into personal details, I can say that in every case there were health risks in their lives, having nothing to do with viruses, which could explain why they died.

What about the hundreds of thousands of people, in the United States alone, who died while taking “anti-HIV” drugs? Did the drugs kill them? What about the prominent advocates of AZT therapy who have died in the past two decades? Did guilt cause them to develop cancer or succumb to organ failure? Consider the recent death of Stephen Lagakos, who co-authored a bogus study (Paul Volberding, Stephen Lagakos et al., New England Journal of Medicine, 5 April 1990), which advocated giving AZT to asymptomatic HIV-positives. Driving on the highway in October 2009, Lagakos suddenly veered over into the lane of oncoming traffic, killing himself, his mother, his wife and the man in the other car. Was Lagakos killed by an Avenging Conscience? Why not? The conjecture is, if anything, just as rational as the conjecture that AIDS-dissidents were killed by a retrovirus.

Read the Rest of this Article

How to Scare the Bleep Out of the American People – Lessons from the AIDS Industry – A House of Numbers Exclusive

In this exclusive clip from House of Numbers, amFAR* founder, Dr. Joseph Sonnabend talks about his split with the group over their “scam” of the American public – the invention of “Heterosexual AIDS.”

(* amFAR – the American Foundation for AIDS research. Their happy slogan is “40 million infected, none cured.” They don’t mention that “infected” really means “HIV positive,” which, after examining HIV testing technology and practice, practically means nothing, except “living in poverty.”)

And Dr. James Redfield, Director Clinical Care and Research, Institute of Human Virology, lets us in on the early public relations decision that framed “AIDS” as an equal-opportunity sex disease in the mind of the generally uninterested, easily-frightened, happy-to-be-manipulated American public – and now in the world at large.

Watch and weep – and learn. Continue reading How to Scare the Bleep Out of the American People – Lessons from the AIDS Industry – A House of Numbers Exclusive