I would note that this does not appear to be consistent with current treatment practice. For example, if one refers to “Effect of Early versus Deferred Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV on Survival” (NEJM, Volume 360:1815-1826 April 30, 2009 Number 18) it is clear that their conclusion is exactly the opposite – that starting HAART early is preferred (which suggests treatment in the absence of substantial disease progression.)

Further, note that Washington DC has already announced plans to initiate HAART proactively (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/17/going-too-far-to-battle-disease.) San Francisco indicates they will also do the same (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/us/04sftreatment.html.)

Setting Records for Iatrogenic Infant Death – Obimbo et al. In Kenya, Africa, 2004

Supported by National Institutes of Health grant HD 23412, Drs. Elizabeth Obimbo et al. administered anti-hiv and other toxic disease-prophylactic drugs from 1999 to June, 2002 to 62 infants determined to be infected with HIV at birth in Nairobi, Kenya. It is significant to note that the great majority of mothers of these infants had been administered AZT during their pregnancies and thereby also having their fetuses integrating the AZT into their fast dividing tissues as AZT is lauded (!) for its chemicals passing through the placenta with great ease to enter and destroy developing fetus tissues, in the name of possibly lowering the rate of hiv transmission from the mother to the fetus.

Obimbo’s study titled “Predictors of Early Mortality in a Cohort of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infected African Children” was published in The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal: Vol 23(6) June 2004 pp536-543.

After birth, these 62 infants were determined infected with hiv by detecting hiv-fragments as determined by DNA PCR tests (this test, as cited elsewhere in this article, is condemned by its Nobel Prize Recipient Dr. Kary Mullis for testing for hiv infection). At four weeks age, an unfortunately acceptable protocol for prophylaxis thought to forestall pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) to those “infected” with hiv, was begun and given throughout the two years of the study. This prophylaxis drug was BACTRIM (trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, also called TMP-SMX, Septra, or Cotrimoxazole) and given at WHO/UNAIDS dose strengths approximately four times that is cautiously administered for briefer time spans as spelled out in Canadian pediatric guidelines for canadian infants. Journal articles have long documented that folic acid, vital for cellular construction and necessary for life, can be inadequately metabolized after the chemical attacks of the BACTRIM components. Folic acid, universally included in vitamin supplements and usually cited in conjunction with vitamin B-12, is necessary to prevent anemia and is also directly related to the synthesis of DNA and other nucleic acids. Needless to say, folic acid metabolization is essential for a growing infant. Have pro-hiv doctors ever actually reviewed the killing effects of their drugs? It appears not – Obimbo et al. just depend on directives originating from “trials” conducted by the drug companies themselves.

What did Obimbo’s study report? By two years after birth, 32 infants had died (52%!), with the median age of death being 6.2 months. Thirty-two out of sixty-two infants died though cared for in a hospital setting of Nairobi. And guess what? Their deaths were blamed on hiv. All of this despite the mid-1990’s press releases by NIAD that hiv took 10 years (now up to 15-plus years) on average to manifest syndrome diseases – if left untreated. Have those devoted to NIAID ever thought to review why Canada has achieved zero perinatal mortality of “infected ” hiv infants? Maybe there is a clue here.

When does it stop – how blind can hiv-believing scientists be? How many thousands more infants be sacrificed to the insanity of poisoning fetuses in the womb, and then poisoning the surviving infants after their birth as is done to the orphans documented by Liam Scheff? Regarding Obimbo and her own sacrificial HIV Altar, as the famous manager of the New York Yankees Casey Stengel said: “You can look it up.”

March 2, 2010 update: WHO’s guidelines for “Resource Limited Settings” have since doubled its Bactrim (aka Cotrimoxazole) dosage for kids at age 6 months, to continue as long as HIV-RNA is detected. The U.S., Canada, WHO now all have the very similar initial dosages.

BUT: Starting in 1996, Canada’s paediatric guidelines were one-fourth strength of the U.S. Slowly morphing to year 2005, Canada’s dose rose to the U.S. level. HOWEVER, Canada starts at 6 weeks after birth (compared to 4 weeks for U.S. and WHO); Also, Canada STOPS its Bactrim after 3 weeks of prophylaxis, whereas the U.S. and WHO continue indefinitely, with increasing dosages. Also, since dosing discretion is contained in the Canada/U.S. nursing guidelines, it is entirely feasible Canadian doctors/nurses have kept their Bactrim dosing at long-used low, non-lethal, dosages. The dose and duration of any strong medicine is of course the difference between benefit and disaster.