While reading the latest post from the Perth Group on the BMJ debate
website, I found myself just laugh and laughing. It would seem the AID$
industry has now topped itself. It would seem that if you get or die from
a given disease BEFORE you go on HAART, you die from AIDS.
However, N-O-W, if you develop the EXACT same disease AFTER going on
HAART, you are now said to have IMMUNE RESTORATION DISEASE (IRD)!!!
I DID NOT MAKE THIS UP! If anyone from the orthodox standpoint is
following along this forum, lurking behind the scenes to see what we
'dissidents' are discussing, YOU'RE NUTS!
I'll quote the exact section of the reply from the Perth Group below. This
is good stuff. This came up in a discussion of T-cell counts and their
meaning, or rather lack thereof, in 'HIV' and AIDS. Here is their post:
By definition T4 cells helps B cells to produce immunoglobulin, hence
their name, T helper cells.
According to the "HIV" experts, "HIV" kills the T4 cells, the helper
cells. If the T4 cells have a helper function, then all AIDS patients must
have hypogammaglobulinaemia (low antibody levels). However, one of the
main laboratory findings in AIDS patients is hypergammaglobulinaemia.
According to the "HIV" experts the diseases which constitute the acquired
immune deficiency syndrome, the S in AIDS, are the consequence of the low
T4 cell number, (AID), induced by "HIV".
However, according to the same experts these diseases continue to appear
even after HAART induces "immune restoration" and decreases of the "viral
load" even to non-detectable levels.
Since the AIDS indicator diseases appear after HAART "suppression of HIV
viraemia" and "immune reconstitution", the only conclusion one can draw is
that neither "HIV" nor the T4 cells are causally related to these
diseases. Instead of coming to these obvious conclusions, the AIDS/"HIV"
experts simply gave these diseases a new name: "Immune Restoration Disease
(IRD)".9 This means that one and the same disease in the same individual
before HAART treatment in the presence of low T4 cells and high "viral
load" is an AIDS disease. After "Suppression of HIV viraemia" and "immune
reconstitution" by HAART, the disease is IRD and the patient dies from
"immune restoration disease", not AIDS.
According to the AIDS/"HIV" experts:
"Differentiation of IRD from an opportunistic infection is important
because IRD indicates a successful, albeit undesirable, effect of
HAART".9
The question is, what does "successful" mean and what is its clinical
relevance?
Reference #9: 9. French MA, Price P, Stone SF. Immune restoration disease
after antiretroviral therapy. AIDS 2004;18:1615-27.

"PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote in message news:<fc686fe244c3faa95cbeb288b07d7431@localhost.t alkabouthealthnetwork.com>...
Posting a previously refuted article (both here, and on the BMJ
forums) which is far from "the latest" is what's known in news group
circles as "trolling". Flooding the group with crap is along similar
lines. I can see you had a slow day yesterday...

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...&output=gplain

Cheers

Bennett

Nuts!

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 21:04:22 -0500, "PaulKing"
<aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote:

No Paul, you did not make this up.

The AIDS drug industry has been struggling to call their drugs
"immune restoring" since the 1980's.

In the 1990's the HAART cocktail cheerleaders struggled to
explain how their immune-restoring cocktails were shown
to have a much higher rate of CMV retinitis etc.

No matter, so now that everybody's cured, what's all the
fuss about?

Blackie

At the Owen Clinic of the University of California, San Diego, a study of
nearly 5,000 patients who sought care for HIV showed a drop in the death
rate starting in 1995, but then an upswing among those who came to the
clinic after 1998. (5 )


A survey of almost 3,000 people enrolled in five US antiretroviral trials
between December 1996 and December 2001 plotted a dogged doubling of the
death rate every 12 months, from 3.9 percent after one year of follow-up,
to 7.9 percent after two, and to 13.1 percent after three. (6)

(5). Mathews W, Barber E. Rising mortality rates among recent entrants to
care for HIV infection. 10th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic
Infections. February 10-14, 2003. Boston. Abstract 911.

(6). Reisler RB, Han C, Burman WJ, et al. Grade 4 events are as important
as AIDS events in the era of HAART. JAIDS 2003;34:379-386.

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:33:32 -0500, "PaulKing"
<aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote:

Perhaps the HIV clinic I know best, the Owen Clinic was aggressively
engaged in pushing the cocktail HAART drugs on those who couldn't
afford private medical care. This was 1996 and afterwards.

I knew Dr. Eric Archibeque, MD of Owen Clinic, circa 1996 and his
lover. Archibeque was doing VERY well using DNCB - he switched
to the cocktails and, well, history doesn't lie.

Archibeque worked for the drug companies as well - he hosted
the show "Ask Dr. Archibeque".

The cocktails didn't work for Dr. Archibeque either (he was HIV+
and asymtomatic prior to using the cocktails) - my sources told
me that he committed suicide in New York a few years later.

No more "Ask Dr. Archibeque".

Just when the HAART cocktails were getting their shoulder in the
harness.

Exploding hearts, livers and devastated immune systems.

I tried to warn them in 1996.

Misc.health.aids and sci.med.aids were dominated by the drug company
goonsquad (George Dubya Carter, et al).

The true murderers were those who believed the drug company religion,
and still do.

We know them well, whether they are called Stein, Canzi, Carter,
Bennett, Holzman or any of the many names they may use.

Blackie