The problem with using this as a sledgehammer to pummel the Aids religionists, however, is that it all comes back to the “discredited” scientist Duesberg. He is the one who claims that Hep C doesn’t exist (maybe there are others who agree, too?) and so it will be easy for them to just ridicule the claim as another of Duesberg’s crackpot ideas and shout “conspiracy theory!” (Or the sardonic variation, “Yes, it’s all a big conspiracy!”)

In that case, the question can be raised, but why are you controlling for Hep C cases but not other diseases? Do studies on other diseases use the same convenient method to mask unfavorable results? I rather suspect that they do, because all of medical research is corrupt, not just the Aids part.

Anyway, great insight. They should give out prizes for lightbulbs like that.

Now the medical researchers just need to come up with a heart attack virus that ARV users can be co-infected with. Then ARVs can be demonstrated to be even more effective at extending life.

Pardon us, Cervantes, but we are baffled by this meta remark – your exemplary comment is not spoiled by cliches at all. Of course this is because the cliches are apt, the whole point is that we have been reiterating the utterly obvious and routine based on unchangeable human nature for years in the face of voluntary myopia, induced by the Fauci meme which paralyzes the intellectual retina into a kind of blindness when presented with the obvious eg antibodies get rid of agents, so they are not going to transmit via infection, so of course HIV antibody positivity cannot transmit, so cannot be causing a pandemic, epidemic or any other -emic except maybe a chemic and a memic ie the spread of the meme itself, and there can be no reason for censorship and no reason for neglecting control groups and no reason for J.P. Moore to call up university administrators and try to get honest professors fired for reviewing HIV and no reason for everyone to fail to support Duesberg’s NIH grant applications for two decades except one reason and one reason only, and that is we are dealing with panic politics protecting a putrid but profitable paradigm.

As we announced to a surprisingly receptive audience at a Park Avenue dinner tonight when the topic of scientific ethics and David Baltimore came up this is the Worldcom of science just as oncogenes are the Enron of science, arising from the systematization of vocational science into a lying machine that subverts the truth to such an extent that even familiar objects look alien and those who like to write original descriptions are reduced to cliches because there is nothing clever or original about what we are dealing with, it is just lying wrapped up in nonsense transparent to the least tutored newspaper reader if only he/she thinks about what he/she is swallowing – namely, a world pandemic of antibodies.

Are we exaggerating? Anyhow, no sweat, we will write a post and otherwise exploit Lohse to the hilt. How amusing that the drug money funded Jefferys drew our attention to this sublime work which illuminates the dark corners of the real scene like a burst of flares above the desert sand at night.

Publicity of the falsity of ‘HIV-positivity’ being a fatal condition should rest on the shoulders of medical journals picking up the bones of the Lohse study, but only if any medical journals have guts to confront the Paradigm, thus far they have not. Anyway, would a second-rank journal be listened to, since NEJM*, JAMA*, and Nature* are also happily/blindly allied with Fauci? It sure won’t be the Pharmas putting out press releases, it sure won’t be NIAID, it sure won’t be CDC, for sure it won’t be Altman/New York Times or the Washington Post, and all the other papers who are in Fauci’s hip pocket.

Harpers/Farber gave it the old college try 16 months ago and broached the whole ball of wax citing Duesberg’s positions, and maybe they are the ones to try again. Otherwise, a major U.S. newspaper seems to me to be the only entity to go to bat, but what top editor has the guts, relying on an expanded Lohse combined with the wealth of studies such as Padian, Gray et al. in Rakai, the deSouza pediatric study in Florida documenting a rare control group compared to AZT-takers (with AZT-takers resulting in 5-6 fold infant deaths compared to no AZT).

So, can Truthseeker be the one with enough clout to have Harpers follow up their first article? Who has an “in” to Harpers? It would be a damn shame if only this Blog (and obscure others) stays aware of Lohse – without getting the word out.

*Times and players change, of course, so maybe these journals have some new blood that is sick and tired of all the gigantic falsities of the HIV world, and would break ranks. Nobody I know, as I toil away in the obscure land of patents relating to medical technology.