1. Predictions of the spread of AIDS based on the HIV hypothesis are continually being readjusted.9 AIDS has not significantly spread beyond the original risk groups and there are many fewer cases of full-blown AIDS than anticipated. For this reason the 'latency period' has continuously been extended. It is now up to 10-15 years and still growing. This 'latency period' is a statistical product designed to reconcile the low incidence of AIDS with the relatively high level of HIV infection.6

2. The number of HIV carriers has remained constant at about 1 million since 1985 (actually it is 300,000 LOWER now) when the antibody test was initiated.5

3. There is not enough HIV in the bodies of PWAs to account for the billions of T-cells killed.7

4. HIV can hardly ever be isolated from patients with AIDS, suggesting that the body's natural vaccination process has occurred.7

5. Karposi's sarcoma has been found in many young male homosexuals who have never been infected by HIV. Even adherents of the HIV hypothesis now concede that KS is not caused by HIV. Nonetheless, this disease is diagnosed as 'AIDS' but only when the sufferer has antibodies to HIV.8

6. Other AIDS indicator diseases with T-cell depletion are found in individuals who do not have antibodies to HIV. In fact, all AIDS diseases have occurred in all risk groups in the absence of HIV or its antibodies since the beginning of the epidemic. HIV infection is thus not a necessary prerequisite for the diagnosis of AIDS - were it not for biased definition.7,8

7. Tests show that the number of HIV-infected T-cells remains the same no matter if you are asymptomatic or have full-blown AIDS. Any other viral infection would show a dramatic increase throughout the course of the disease.7

8. Although sexually transmitted diseases infect males and females equally, more than 90% of American AIDS sufferers are male. This is true even of health care workers who develop AIDS, although two-thirds of all US health care workers are female.6

9. The risk of getting AIDS for HIV-infected people varies tenfold with gender or country. In America, the annual AIDS risk of an HIV-infected person is currently 4%; in Africa it is 0.3%.6,7

10. HIV is spread primarily through homosexuals in the US and primarily through heterosexuals in Africa.7 This would suggest that AIDS is possibly a non-infectious disease.

11. So-called 'African AIDS' affects males and females equally, and also involves a different pattern of associated opportunistic infections. These differing patterns do not rescue the HIV hypothesis for American AIDS, but indicate that a single virus may not be responsible for the multitude of conditions diagnosed as AIDS in Africa and America.7

12. About three-fourths of the 20,000 US haemophiliacs were infected with HIV almost 10 years ago. According to the HIV hypothesis, at least half of those infected should have died by now—but the mortality rate among haemophiliacs has remained constant at 2% over the last 15 years.10

13. HIV is said to be a sexually transmitted virus, yet it is barely detectable in the semen of AIDS patients.11

14. The same diseases are found in similar frequencies in HIV-positive and HIV-negative intravenous drug users, and the overall mortality in the two groups is the same.12

Check out the ppv of these Italian figures! What happened is that they performed a confirmatory test on the 32 out of 25,562 that tested positive - only 2 remained positive.



This is data on testing the Italian armed forces. Get this.

Table II

HIV Screening in Military Blood Transfusion Centers

Number of dontations: 25,562

Number of blood donations ELISA positive: 32

Number of blood donations after confirmation test: 2

In other words, after performing a confirmation test

for the ELISA, only *2* of the 32 positive tests remained positive.

That is positive predictive value of 2/32 or 6 1/4%!!!!!!!!!!!!!

6.25%

In a country with very few other pathogens that could cause

a false positive result like in Africa (malaria, leprosy, tb, ddt, etc.).

You just run around having unprotected sex with whoever you like.

But if we ever meet, don't be offended if I refuse to shake your hand without gloves on.

I don't really want to shake hands with right wing types thank you.



THE SPERM VS. THE AIDS VIRUS

A paper in the February 1992 issue of Applied and Environmental Microbiology reports that filtration techniques show the HIV-1 virus to be 0.1 micron (4 millionths of an inch) in diameter. It is three times smaller than the herpes virus, 60 times smaller than the syphilis

spirochete, and 50 to 450 times smaller than sperm. (8)

THE FLAWED CONDOM

Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) researchers, using powerful electron microscopes, have found that new latex, from which

condoms are fabricated, contains "maximum inherent flaw[s]" (that is, holes) 70 microns in diameter. (9)

These holes are 700 times larger than the HIV-1 virus. There are pores in latex, and some of the pores are large enough to pass sperm-sized particles. Carey, et al., observed leakage of HIV-sized particles through 33%+ of the latex condoms tested. In addition, as Gordon points out in his review, the testing procedures for condoms are less than desirable. United States condom manufacturers are allowed 0.4% leaky condoms (AQL). Gordon states, "The fluctuations in sampling permits many batches not meeting AQL to be sold." In the United

States, 12% of domestic and 21% of imported batches of condoms have failed to meet the 0.4% AQL. (10)

CONDOMS FAIL TESTING

In a 1988 study sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, Bruce Voeller of the Mariposa Foundation in Topanga, California, a non-profit organization dedicated to preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, ranked 31 brands of latex condoms according to how well they met the U.S. and international quality assurance standards designed to ensure that condoms provide an effective

barrier against human sperm.

"Many of the condoms now on the market would not get FDA approval if they were required to meet today’s standards," says

Voeller. Although all condoms sold in the U.S.are supposed to pass quality assurance tests, those marketed before 1976 need not meet the more stringent requirements necessary to win FDA marketing approval. (11)

Dr. Collart reports that "Gotszche and Hording in their study of in vivo [real life] condom failure rates concluded ‘Condoms to

prevent HIV transmission do not imply truly safe sex.’ In addition Steiner, et al., observed newer lots of condoms had actual breakage rates of 3.5-8.8%, while actual breakage rates for older lots ranged from 9.8-18.6%. In a study conducted by Ahmed, et al., 29%-42% of those who had used condoms experienced at least one breakage. In a survey conducted by the University of Manchester, 52% of those who had

obtained condoms from their family planning clinic had one or more either burst or slip off in the 3 months before the survey. In

studies by Albert, et al., and by Wright, et al., 36% and 38% of their respondents reported condom failures respectively." (12)

CONDOM + SPERMICIDE

Some have advocated the use of spermicide containing nonoxynol-9 in the prevention of HIV infection. However, the protective effects of nonoxynol-9 have not been established in vivo for any of the viral STDs. Some reports suggest that spermicides (including nonoxynol-9) may be associated with irritation and ulceration of genital and rectal epithelia, side-effects that may actually facilitate HIV infection.

In a study with Nairobi prostitutes, a higher rate of new HIV infections was found among women using nonoxynol-9 than among those not using it. Additionally, in a study of rhesus monkeys who were exposed to a high dose of simian immunodeficiency virus following vaginally inserted nonoxynol-9 foam, half the monkeys developed an infection. (13, 14, 15, 16)

CONDOM CLIMATE CONTROL

Condoms are sensitive to heat and cold, yet they are not normally transported in climate-controlled vehicles. Vesey, in his study ofcondoms,checked 72,000 trucks and has actual photographs of eggs frying in the backs of trucks used for condom distribution.

Partly due to Vesey’s study, Burlington County, NJ, banned the distribution of condoms at the county’s AIDS counselling center, because they concluded that the risk of liability for condom failures was too great. (17)

RISKY BUSINESS

The United States Public Health Service states that sexual relations, even with a condom, with a person who is

HIV-positive is so risky that alternative methods of expressing physical intimacy should be considered. Additionally, Public Health Services warns that the rate of HIV transmission in anal intercourse is so high that the practice should be avoided. (27)

PANACEA OR PLACEBO?

In conclusion, Herbert Ratner, M.D., offers the best summary of all when he says,

Actually, the major accomplishment of the condom campaign to prevent AIDS is to impress the promoters, politicians and the public at large that something is being done; and although well-intentioned, it offers more of a placebo than a panacea.

Publicizing the condom to the four winds is, for the most part, the bravura of a puritan who is trying to prove to the world

that he is not a puritan. To concentrate on the mechanical aspects of the sex act to the exclusion of the emotional and psychological aspects (which the condom campaign ignores) is the essence of Puritanism. The only difference between the new and the old is that whereas the traditional puritans were alleged to believe that sex was something to be isolated and repressed, neo-puritans accept sex as something to be isolated and exercised. (28)



Reviewed by Joel McIlhaney, M.D., of the Medical Institute for Sexual Health





NOTES

1.Weller, Susan C., "A Meta-Analysis of Condom Effectiveness in Reducing Sexually Transmitted HIV," Social Science and

Medicine, Vol. 36, #12, June 1993, pp. 1635-1644.

2.Smith, Richard W., The Condom: Is It Really Safe Sex? (unpublished, October 1990) pp. 8-9.

3.Collart, David G., M.D., Condom Failure for Protection From Sexual Transmission of the HIV: A Review of the Medical

Literature, Feb. 16 1993.

4.Zenilman, Jonathan, et al., "Condom Use to Prevent Incident STDs: The Validity of Self-Reported Condom Use," Sexually

Transmitted Diseases, Jan.-Feb. 1995, pp.15-21;

5.Ravenel S. duBose, M.D., "Comments and Observations," Aug. 5, 1995.

6.Joel McIlhaney, Jr., M.D., "Chlamydia Trachomatis; The Most Common Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Disease in the United

States," Medical Institute for Sexual Health Sexual Health Update, Vol. 3, #3, Fall, 1995.

7.Friedman and Trivelli, "Condom Availability for Youth: A High Risk Alternative," Pediatrics, 2/97, p. 285.

8.Lytle, C. D., et al., "Filtration Sizes of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 and Surrogate Viruses Used to Test Barrier

Materials," Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Vol. 58, #2, Feb. 1992.

9."Anomalous Fatigue Behavior in Polysoprene," Rubber Chemistry and Technology, Vol. 62, #4, Sep.-Oct. 1989.

10.Collart, David G., M.D., loc. cit.

11.Nowak, Rachel, "Research Reveals Condom Conundrums," The Journal of NIH Research, Vol. 5, Jan. 1993, pp. 32, 33.

12.Collart, David G., M.D., op. cit.

13.Bird, K.D., AIDS, Vol. 5, pp. 791-796, 1991.

14.Voeller, B., AIDS, Vol. 6, pp. 341-342, 1992.

15.Kreiss, J.; Ruminjo, I.; Ngugi, E.; Roberts, P.; Ndinya-Achola, J.; and Plummer, F., 1989 V International Conference on AIDS,

Montreal.

16.Miller, C.J.; Alexander, N.J.; Sutjipto, S.; et al., J. Med. Primatol, Vol. 19, pp. 401-409, 1990.

17.Vesey, W.B., HLI Reports, Vol. 9, pp. 1-4, 1991.

18.April, K., and Schreiner, W., Schweiz. med. Wschr., Vol. 120, pp. 972-978, 1990.

19.Frosner, G.G., 1989, Infection, Vol. 17, pp. 1-3.

20.Fischl, M.A.; Dickinson, G.M.; Segsl, A.; Flanagan, S.; and Rodriguez, M.; Presentation THP. 92, III International Conference

on

AIDS in Washington D.C., 1-5 June, p. 178, 1987.

21.Klimes, I., et al., AIDS Care, Vol. 4, p. 151, 1992.

22.Detels, R.; English, P.; Visscher, B.R.; Jacobson, L.; Kingsley, L.A.; Chmiel, J.S.; Dudley, J.P.; Eldred, L.J.; and Ginzburg,

H.M.;Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, Vol. 2, pp. 77-83, 1989.

23.Gordon, R., loc. cit.

24.Joffe, G.P.; Foxman, B.; Schmidt, A.J.; Farris, K.B.; Carter, R.J.; Neumann, S.; Tolo, K.-A.; and Walters, A.M.; 1992, Sexually

Transmitted Diseases, Vol. 19, pp. 272-278.

25.Cohen, D.A.; Dent, C.; MacKinnon, D.; and Hahn, G.; Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Vol. 19, pp. 245-251, 1992.

26.Frösner, G.G., loc. cit.

27.Byer, C.O., and Shainberg, L.W., Dimensions of Human Sexuality, Wm. C. Brown Publishers, 1991.

28.Ratner, Herbert, M.D., "Condoms and AIDS," ALL About Issues, Feb. 1989, p. 36.

CDC Knew About Condoms' Limitations, Doctors Say

Foxnews

(Extracts)

Tuesday, July 24, 2001

By Kelley Beaucar

A group of doctors Tuesday claimed that the federal government, specifically the Centers for Disease Control, has for at least a year

suppressed a study about the effectiveness of condoms.

The doctors claim that the government has known about the limitations of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted diseases but

nevertheless mounted a campaign that deliberately misrepresented the risks in sex education curricula and public health programs.

"The entire public health model developed by the CDC and based on the idea that condoms offer protection, is a lie," said Dr. Hall Wallis,

a member of consortium. "The skeleton is now out of the closet."

At a Washington, D.C., news conference, the 10,000-member Physicians Consortium claimed that the CDC has known for years that

condoms offer little protection against sexually transmitted diseases such as gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis and genital herpes.

Word of the condoms’ shortfalls came in a panel report released Friday by the National Institutes of Health. The NIH panel concluded

that there was "insufficient evidence" that condoms protect against STDs.

Are condoms a greater health risk than the std's they don't really protect against?

It is politically correct to advocate condoms but every day the evidence increases that they do little to protect and may pose a very serious health risk. It is hard for the CDC and FDA to examine these risks as they have been so vocal in promoting condoms but could their silence lead to dire consequences. I for one having done exaustive research strongly feel so.



"...... new concerns are arising regarding allergic or other toxic reactions to various components of latex condoms such as vulcanization accelerators, latex proteins, spermicides and finishing powders."



"* Studies are needed to evaluate the best lubricants to use in the manufacture of condoms. Evidence suggests that the right quantity, type and placement of lubricant is important for condom functionality, acceptability and safety. In addition, the added value and risk presented by spermicidal lubricants and by dry finishing powders (e.g. talc or cornstarch) should be critically examined."

"Since the late 1980s the reported incidence

of allergy to natural rubber latex has increased dramatically, as much as 12 -fold."

"Latex allergy is incurable, although the symptoms, such as itching, soreness, painful blistering, runny noses, swollen eyes, asthma symptoms and anaphylaxis can be ameliorated.

Everyone who has contact wi th natural rubber latex is potentially at risk from sensitisation. Both patients and health care workers can be at risk from allergic reactions to natural rubber latex. Over the past decade, allergic reactions to natural

rubber latex have become a major public health concern."

" Once a person has developed latex allergy, however mild, they are “sensitised” to latex and are at risk from severe allergic reactions."

"Delayed cell-mediated reactions are the most common form of hypersensitivity reaction to natural rubber latex. These reactions are to individual chemical residues from the production process such as accelerants used in the vulcanisation process which is required to strengthen the product. The residual chemicals may bloo on the surface of the products and can be absorbed through the skin upon contact."



Condoms contain compounds known to cause cancer and serious birth defects in substantial quantities



SOURCE. Condom Industry web site and Beacon Pharmaceuticals, July 2001

BTW, I'm a spokesperson for the Holy Catholic Church.

See how the opposite sex experiences orgasm

http://viral.lycos.co.uk/attachments/1949/simulator.htm

I am no fan of the Pope but for once (for the wrong reasons) he is correct about something.

AIDS Denial Kills

If you want to lowdown on these posts about AIDS, read this article, linked.

http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-nyc-editorial/2003-October/003110.html

from the article:

"AIDS is not a myth. That is the plain fact. From looking at what happened in San Francisco with this issue a couple of years back back, we can see that the folks who aggressively promote the "don't use condoms" and "stop taking your medicine" schools of thought are not principled. In fact, there was one well-publicized case where some of these "activists" required restraining orders for stalking and harrassing individuals with whom they disagreed. We can also see this behavior in recent spam on the wire calling non-denialists "Jacobin Pharma-Fags." This is in reference to their theory that the ENTIRE AIDS movement (and medical establishment and governments of third world countries who are creating generic versions of life-saving drugs) have been bought out by pharmaceutical companies. Fascinating theory. Great delivery."