"All the world's a stage we pass through." - R. Ayana

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

AIDS: The Real Story Part 1 – The Heterosexual Myth

AIDS – The Real Story

What You Probably Haven’t Been Told

Part 1 – The Heterosexual Myth


photo

·        Why AIDS is not a problem for heterosexuals who avoid anal sex  
·        Where did it come from?  
·        WHO is responsible

 INTRODUCTION
 This is a report by a researcher who has been compiling, sifting and cross-checking information on AIDS and related subjects for decades. A number of glaring inconsistencies have caught the attention of people closely observing the AIDS phenomenon in the sciences and the media. Some of these are outlined and connected below. Most of this information has been in the public domain for decades but has been consistently ignored by relevant authorities and mis-reported to the public.

           The sheer amount of disconnected information on AIDS thoroughly confuses most people regarding the true nature of this syndrome. Perhaps this series will help to replace the baseless fears that have come to be associated with human sexuality with a more enlightened attitude. 

          Please check the Glossary (coming soon) if the language becomes difficult. You won’t need any pecialized knowledge to follow this convoluted trail in pursuit of the real effects and probable evolution of AIDS.   

INTRODUCING AIDS



What Is It?

A.I.D.S. – Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome – is believed to be caused by different types of a very small virus called H.I.V. – Human Immuno-deficiency Virus. Like all viruses, HIV is made of genes wrapped up in a coat of protein. But unlike the majority of viruses and other organisms, its genetic coding is made of RNA (Ribo-Nucleic Acid) coiled at the core instead of DNA. Its coat is made f two layers of proteins inside a fatty surface layer with glycoproteins (proteins with sugars attached) embedded in it.

           In the core along with the RNA are some molecules of an enzyme called reverse transcriptase, that the virus uses to reproduce itself. That’s the virus associated with AIDS – a very simple organism called a retrovirus that requires special cells from the human immune system (T4 ‘helper’ cells) to multiply itself. 

          HIV is a member of the retrovirus sub-family called lentiviruses (Lentivirinae), or ‘slow viruses’. Three other species of lentiviruses known to exist are those causing maedi-visna disease in sheep, infectious anaemia in horses and encephalitis-arthritis in goats (CAE or Caprine-Arthritis-Encephalitis).
 
 

The Heterosexual Myth

We’ve been told that AIDS is caused by an organism transmitted by heterosexual intercourse – that people can catch it in the same way they catch syphilis, gonorrhea and other venereal diseases. We’ve been told it’s associated with promiscuity and having multiple sex partners, and that the people of the world have had to change their sexual behaviour and lifestyles to cope with this lethal threat. It would seem foolish to  gnore these warnings, logical as they seem. But how do we know they’re true? A careful review of AIDS research, statistics and related literature paints a very different picture than that portrayed by authorities and media.


Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics 
  
Reportage of statistics often misrepresents the data and statistical data is often conceptually flawed. Some examples:


          Widely circulated statistics seemed to say that the number of heterosexual AIDS sufferers doubled in just two years, from 1986 to 1988. These figures came from the authoritative U.S. Centers for Disease Control (C.D.C.) in their Public Health Reports. They used figures released at a conference held in June 1986 to claim a rise from 2% to 4% in the percentage of heterosexually-transmitted AIDS cases.

           The CDC didn’t mention that this 100% jump to 4% came about only by lumping together two different categories of AIDS sufferers that had previously been kept distinct – native-born Americans (2%), and Africans and Haitians who had recently moved to the United States (2%). There was no actual increase in the percentage of sufferers.

           CDC chief statistician Dr Meade Morgan and AIDS program director Dr James Curran (later dismissed) also predicted that heterosexual transmission would account for 5.3% of cases by 1991. Most of the media preferred a larger figure – 9% - quoted from an anonymous study published in the same Public Health Reports
          The anonymous study included patients who had no idea what their source of HIV contact had been, blamed prostitutes, refused to be interviewed, or had died. Because some researchers thought that some of these ‘unexplained’ cases may have been caused by heterosexual contact, a statistician created the 9% figure by simply adding all these ‘unknown’ categories together and invented a ‘worst-case’ projection – that was quoted around the world. It’s impossible to say whether any of these unexplained cases belonged in the heterosexual category.

           “When I asked Dr Morgan about this he replied that ‘the [anonymous] report was prepared in only a day and a half to two days’, that ‘it was probably an omission’ not to state explicitly that cases of undetermined origin had been lumped together with the heterosexuals, but that ‘if somebody called we’d set them straight.’ Virtually no-one has called…”, reporter Michael Fumento wrote in 1988.[i] 

          US Surgeon General Koop used the CDC’s figures to claim that “the curve for heterosexuals contracting AIDS is going up more than twice as fast because they are not taking the precautions homosexuals have learned are essential.” The real reason the curve went up “twice as fast” was shoddy statistical practices. Surgeon General Koop also predicted that “among heterosexuals there are going to be 20 times as many cases…” (by 1990).

[ii]           This was either deliberate disinformation or culpably inept misinformation. Which was better for the Surgeon General? The real profile of a ‘typical AIDS victim’ in the US was a lower-class Negro woman who was the regular sex partner of an intra-venous (I.V.) drug user, according to his own department’s findings in September 1987. White heterosexuals made up less than half of one percent of all US AIDS cases – even including the above statistics juggling.

           In one of the most extensive contemporary studies of HIV in the general population ever conducted, only 0.04% of over a million blood donors in the US, and 0.15% of 308,078 applicants for military service (mostly single males) tested positive for HIV antibodies.[iii]
 
          Early figures on heterosexual spread were ‘coloured’ by false data from the US Army. The Journal of the American Medical Association reported a 1985 US Army study in which the proportion of men with AIDS reported to have engaged in homosexuality or IV drug use – the real major risk factors for AIDS – was changed from 26% of the total to 86% on closer scrutiny of cases. But not before the earlier figure had already clouded many surveys and media reports.[iv]   

          If it is possible for AIDS to be transmitted by heterosexual vaginal (or even oral) sex it’s extraordinary that this has still not been conclusively proven after a generation of multi-billion dollar research – and yet we’re consistently told that AIDS is a heterosexually transmitted disease that necessitates complete changes in normal, healthy and transformational human sexual and sensual practices. Most people have remained in a state of sexual confusion, stultification or worse since these statistical ‘errors’ were first spread around the world and they have still not been refuted and declaimed for what they are – lies. Who benefits from this?  
         Back in 1988 again, an annual survey of US women’s views showed that 71% of respondents were worried about a heterosexual AIDS epidemic – up from 56% the previous year. 26% mistakenly believed they could catch AIDS through casual contact and 70% said they were more cautious about sex.[v] This parallels other studies, some of which show that women in particular were scared into celibacy by the imaginary threat of heterosexual AIDS. In light of this, we’ll present a few more ‘official’ statistics to more clearly illustrate the flexibility of the figures.  


photo
 
Yes, Minister

For instance, the Australian Government Health Department released a Bulletin in April 1987 that said three heterosexuals had died of AIDS. This was widely reported. But their Bulletin for September 1987 showed that this figure had been ‘revised’ to one heterosexual death since the ‘epidemic’ began in the late 1970s! This was not widely reported. These Bulletins were distributed throughout Australia and the world by the Federal Government and formed the basis for statistics and media reports.[vi]  

“Those who are suggesting that we are going to see an explosive spread of AIDS in the heterosexual population have to explain why this isn’t happening.”   -         US Centers for Disease Control Chief Epidemiologist, Dr Harold Jaffe[vii] 

 Back in Australia in 1988, of only seven apparent cases of ‘heterosexual transmission’, two were women where the partner was already infected; the remaining five – 3 women and 2 men – were presumed to be heterosexual even though their partners and means of infection were unknown! In the other two cases it was uncertain whether anal sex had taken place, or that the means of transmission was heterosexual and not, for instance, related to IV drug use. All information was based on voluntary interviews, not clinical research.[viii] 

          In March 1988, the Australian National Advisory Committee on AIDS (NACAIDS) announced that there were between 50,000 and 100,000 people infected with HIV in Australia. These figures were widely circulated by the press and other media (the previous August the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.) released figures claiming 60,000 reported cases world-wide and a potential of between five and ten million unreported cases).[ix] 

          In response, the chairman of Victoria’s AIDS Advisory Committee, internationally recognized virologist Professor Ian Gust, said these general figures were probably based on out-of-date and inflated estimates of the spread  of AIDS in homosexual men,[x] which was itself receding.

           At the same time only about 800 Australians had even been identified as having AIDS and the number of new cases of HIV infection was roughly stable, despite a huge increase in the number of tests being performed. Less than 1% of these were ascribed to ‘heterosexual’ transmission, and this classification remained dubious. The Australian Blood Bank reported in early 1988 that only one blood donation (out of hundreds of thousands carried out in preceding months) had tested positive for HIV. 

          When asked whether the public should be concerned about heterosexual spread of AIDS in 1988, pre-eminent eminent virologist Professor Peter H. Duesberg (considered the microbiologist who knew more about retroviruses – the group to which HIV belongs – than any other) replied; 

“I wouldn’t be worried at all. The virus has been around for eight years in a country with more than 200 million people and not even 1,000 women have got the disease. Whatever’s causing the disease, it’s not easy to get. I might wear a condom to avoid other diseases but not for AIDS.         “Well, maybe if I wanted to have anal intercourse with a prostitute in Port-au-Prince…” 
 
Only a few publications at the edges of the mainstream media clearly presented doubts about false data and erroneous conclusions being presented to a panicky public that didn’t know what to believe. Anastasia Lekatsas, ex-coordinator of investigations for the AIDS Surveillance Unit of the New York City Department of Health, followed up reports of heterosexual spread of AIDS for years. By careful investigation and questioning of patients, their friends and relatives she found that many patients had lied on the standard questionnaires (used to compile statistics on AIDS) – that many ‘heterosexual’ cases had, in fact, belonged to high-risk groups.

           The proportion of New York City’s 15,000 cases with no identifiable risk factors remained at half a percent – just 85 cases, including only 8 men who claimed to have caught the disease from a woman. Lekatsas believed almost all of these were lying, but unlike the scores of other cases she confirmed to be non-heterosexual she could find no proof – and the men were dead and couldn’t be questioned (See Rolling Stone, February 1989). 

          AIDS is not a ‘gay plague’, not a heterosexual plague, nor in fact a plague at all. The only ways to get HIV/AIDS are by intravenous drug use (with infected needles), direct blood contact with infected blood or blood products (probably including eye splashes), or anal sex, heterosexual or homosexual – and the receptive partner bears the risk; the ‘active’ partner may not be able to contract HIV at all from the ‘receptive’ partner.  

 -          R.Ayana
Footnotes:

[i]  Michael Fumento, The AIDS Backlash, The Bulletin (Australia), 22-3-88 p.61 (our parentheses)
 [ii] Ibid, p.  62
[iii]  Dr Jonathan Mann, Director of the WHO special program on AIDS, New Scientist, 26-3-87 p. 41
[iv] via The Sydney Morning Herald 3-8-87
[v]  1988 sixth annual edition of the US Women’s View Survey
[vi] Communicable Diseases Intelligence Bulletin Nos 87/7 (April) and 87?18 (September) 1987 – Australian Federal Dept. of Health
[vii] The AIDS Backlash, The Bulletin 22-3-88 p. 62
[viii] March 1988 figures from NHMRC Special Unit in AIDS Epidemiology and Child Research (Australia)
[ix] NACAIDS, reported in Sydney Telegraph 30-8-87
[x] The Australian, 25-3-88
See



Images -

 





For further enlightenment enter a word or phrase into the search box or click on a tab at the bottom of the page @  New Illuminati:

or http://newilluminati.blog-city.com  (this one only works with Firefox)

And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com
 http://newilluminati.blog-city.com (this one only works with Firefox)


This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


No comments:

Post a Comment

Add your perspective to the conscious collective