Picture

SOBRE LOS TESTS Y TRATAMIENTOS

1) Tests:

A) Sin aislamiento viral no hay posibilidad de disponer de proteinas para test de anticuerpos (ELISA o WB) ni ARN para iniciadores de PCR u otras pruebas genéticas:
 
Current Medical Research and Opinion Vol. 14: 185-186, 1998HIV Antibody Tests and Viral Load - More Unanswered Questions and a Further Plea for ClarificationEleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos (1), Valendar F.Turner (2), John M. Papadimitriou (3), David Causer (1), Barry Page (1)

(1) Department of Medical Physics, (2) Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia; (3) Department of Pathology, University of Western Australia
At present it is accepted that in 1983 Montagnier proved the existence of HIV. In their 1983 study Montagnier and his colleagues took the supernatant from cultures containing tissue derived from AIDS patients and banded it in sucrose density gradients. They claimed that the 1.16 gm/ml band represented purified virus.(1) Some of the proteins and RNAs were considered to represent the retroviral proteins and retroviral genome respectively. Subsequently the proteins were used as antigens for the antibody tests and the nucleic acids for hybridisation and PCR studies. Indeed, it is logical that if the 1.16 gm/ml band contained purified viral-like particles and the particles were infectious, one has no choice but to consider both the proteins and the RNA as being viral constituents.Since then many other researchers have conducted similar experiments. However, for some unknown reason, up to 1997, neither Montagnier’s group nor anybody else published electron micrographs of the 1.16gm/ml band showing that the band contained nothing else but particles with the morphological characteristics of retroviral particles, that is, purified particles. The reason for this, at least for the Montagnier group, became obvious in an interview Montagnier gave in July 1997 to the French journalist Djamel Tahi. When Montagnier was asked why such electron micrographs were not published, his answer was because, even after "Roman effort", they could see no particles with "morphology typical of retroviruses".(2)Since the band did not contain even retrovirus-like particles, not to mention retroviral particles nor indeed particles with unique retroviral morphology as the HIV is said to be, the questions then arise:1. How is it possible to claim proof for retroviral purification and thus for the existence of HIV?2. How is it possible to consider the proteins which banded at 1.16gm/ml to be the proteins of a unique retrovirus, HIV, and to use them as antigens in antibody tests to prove infection with a deadly retrovirus, HIV?3. How is it possible to consider the RNAs which banded at 1.16gm/ml represents the genome of a unique retrovirus and to use these as probes and primers for hybridisation and PCR tests to prove infection with this virus and in fact to measure the viral load?

B) El WB no es prueba de Infección por VIH:IS A POSITIVE WESTERN BLOT PROOF OF HIV INFECTION?Papadopulos-Eleopulos, E., Turner, V. F. & Papadimitriou, J. M. Bio/technology 11, 696-707 (1993).SUMMARY It is currently accepted that a positive Western blot (WB) HIV antibody test is synonymous with HIV infection and the attendant risk of developing and dying from AIDS. In this communication we present a critical evaluation of the presently available data on HIV isolation and antibody testing. The available evidence indicates that: (a) the antibody tests are not standardised; (b) the antibody tests are not reproducible; (c) the WB proteins (bands) which are considered to be coded by the HIV genome and to be specific to HIV may not be coded by the HIV genome and may in fact represent normal cellular proteins; (d) even if the proteins are specific to HIV, because no gold standard has been used and may not even exist to determine specificity, a positive WB may represent nothing more than cross‑reactivity with the many non‑HIV antibodies present in AIDS patients and those at risk, and thus be unrelated to the presence of HIV. We conclude that the use of the HIV antibody tests as a diagnostic and epidemiological tool for HIV infection needs to be reappraised.

B) El WB no es prueba de Infección por VIH:IS A POSITIVE WESTERN BLOT PROOF OF HIV INFECTION?Papadopulos-Eleopulos, E., Turner, V. F. & Papadimitriou, J. M. Bio/technology 11, 696-707 (1993).SUMMARY It is currently accepted that a positive Western blot (WB) HIV antibody test is synonymous with HIV infection and the attendant risk of developing and dying from AIDS. In this communication we present a critical evaluation of the
presently available data on HIV isolation and antibody testing. The available evidence indicates that: (a) the antibody tests are not standardised; (b) the antibody tests are not reproducible; (c) the WB proteins (bands) which are considered to be coded by the HIV genome and to be specific to HIV may not be coded by the HIV genome and may in fact represent normal cellular proteins; (d) even if the proteins are specific to HIV, because no gold standard has been used and may not even exist to determine specificity, a positive WB may represent nothing more than cross‑reactivity with the many non‑HIV antibodies present in AIDS patients and those at risk, and thus be unrelated to the presence of HIV. We conclude that the use of the HIV antibody tests as a diagnostic and epidemiological tool for HIV infection needs to be reappraised.

c)La probabilidad de casos de SIDA sin diagnóstico sexológico de VIH es algo muy inusual?

Las estadísticas de “seropositivos” y “casos de SIDA” no coinciden en absoluto:

Bauer, Henry H.: The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory. North Carolina, McFarland & Company, 2007.

D) No hay evidencia científica de que el VIH destruya los linfocitos T4 ni de que un descenso de Linfocitos T4 sea necesario o suficiente para el desarrollo del síndrome clínico:

Genetica 95: 5-24, 1995 A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE HIV-T4-CELL-AIDS HYPOTHESIS Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos,1 Valendar F.Turner,2 John M. Papadimitriou,3 David Causer,1 Bruce Hedland-Thomas,1 & Barry Page1 1: Department of Medical Physics, 2: Department of Emergency Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia; 3: Department of Pathology, University of Western Australia. AbstractThe data generally accepted as proving the HIV theory of AIDS, HIV cytopathy, destruction of T4 lymphocytes, and the relationsip between T4 cells, HIV and the acquired immune deficiency clinical syndrome are critically evaluated. It is concluded these data do not prove that HIV preferentially destroys T4 cells or has any cytopathic effects, neither do they demonstrate that T4 cells are preferentially destroyed in AIDS patients, or that T4 cell destruction and HIV are either necessary or sufficient prerequisites for the development of the clinical syndrome.

2) Tratamientos:

No se critica que los antivirales tengan efectos adversos, sino que ÚNICAMENTE tienen efectos adversos, graves y tendencialmente mortales:

A) Los retrovirales no pueden impedir la replicación del “VIH”:A Critical Analysis of the Pharmacology of AZT and its Use in AIDSEleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, et al.SummaryThe triphosphorylated form of the nucleoside analogue 3'-azido-3'-deoxythymidine (Zidovudine, AZT) is claimed to interrupt the HIV replication cycle by a selective inhibition of viral reverse transcriptase, thereby preventing the formation of new proviral DNA in permissive, uninfected cells. Given that initial HIV infection of an individual instigates abundant HIV replication from inception until death, and that the life of infected T-cells is only several days, the administration of AZT should lead both in vitro and in vivo (i) to decreased formation of proviral DNA; and thus (ii) to decreased frequencies of 'HIV isolation' (detection of p24 or reverse transcription or both) in stimulated cultures/cocultures of T-cells from seropositive individuals; (iii) to decreased synthesis of HIV p24 and RNA ('antigenaemia', 'plasma viraemia', 'viral load') ultimately resulting in low or absent levels of all three parameters; and (iv) to a perfect and direct correlation between all these parameters. A critical analysis of the presently available data shows that no such evidence exists, an outcome not unexpected given the pharmacological data on AZT. HIV experts all agree that only the triphosphorylated form of AZT (AZTTP) and not the unphosphorylated form administered to patients, nor its mono- or diphosphate, is the active agent. Furthermore, the mechanism of action is the ability of AZTTP to halt the formation of HIV-DNA (chain termination). However, although this claim was posited from the outset, AZT underwent clinical trials and was introduced as a specific anti-HIV drug many years before there were any data proving that the cells of patients are able to triphosphorylate the parent compound to a level considered sufficient for its putative pharmacological action. Notwithstanding, from the evidence published since 1991 it has become apparent that no such phosphorylation takes place and thus AZT cannot possess an anti-HIV effect. However, the scientific literature does elucidate: (i) a number of biochemical mechanisms which predicate the likelihood of widespread, serious toxicity from use of this drug; (ii) in vitro data proving that AZT has significant antibacterial and antiviral properties which confound interpretation of its effects when administered to patients. Based on all these data it is dificult if not impossible to explain why AZT was introduced and still remains the most widely recommended and used anti-HIV drug.

B) Los fabricantes dicen exactamente lo mismo:– Glaxo: «Retrovir no es una cura para el infección por VIH o el SIDA».– GlaxoSmithKline: «COMBIVIR no es una cura para la infección por VIH».– Boehringer Ingelheim: «VIRAMUNE no cura el VIH ni el SIDA».– Merck: «No se sabe si CRIXIVAN prolongará la vida».– Gilead Sciences: «VIREAD no cura la infección por VIH-1 ni el SIDA».

C) Los retrovirales tienen graves efectos adversos y son causa de muerte y malformaciones:Los efectos documentados del AZT (y otros supuestos inhibidores de la Retrotranscriptasa) son:– Dañan las mitocondrias celulares produciendo: miopatías musculares, problemas cardiovasculares, demencias, encefalopatías, fallos hepáticos y daños genéticos en fetos.Frenan la síntesis de ADN, lo que significa que pueden matar las células o mutarlas produciendo cáncer o malformaciones.Oxidan los grupos sulfidrilos produciendo entre otros: adelgazamiento extremo, atrofia muscular, anemia, cáncer, inmunodeficiencia y daños en hígado y riñón.Los argumentos que comparan el TARGA con los antiguos retrovirales sólo demuestran que los primeros tienen una acción más lenta que los segundos, pero son igualmente tóxicos y SÓLO tóxicos. Veamos: Impiden la actividad bioquímica en las células. Sus principales efectos documentados son:Bloquean la acción de las enzimas humanas: primero las proteasas-aspartato (pepsina y catepsina) responsables de la digestión y asimilación de alimentos; después todas las demás, alterando las reacciones bioquímicas y finalmente toda la actividad vital.Son compuestos indestructibles que no pueden ser eliminados del cuerpo. Se acumulan produciendo: anemias hemolíticas (destrucción de hematíes), diarrea, alteraciones en el equilibrio proteasas-antiproteasas naturales, cólicos renales, vértigo, inflamación de la vejiga, cirrosis hepáticas, neumonía, rigidez en tejidos del sistema circulatorio y linfático, depresión...En el año 97 —apenas dos años después de su anuncio triunfalista— aparecieron en publicaciones científicas y en la prensa los primeros avisos de la toxicidad de los «Inhibidores de proteasa»:Lancet, 29-3-97: «Hepatitis grave en tres pacientes de SIDA tratados con Indinavir»; «se descartó causas virales, alcohol u otros agentes hepatotóxicos».Lancet, 12-4-97: la British HIV Association admite que los beneficios clínicos de los cócteles no están demostrados, y que hay interacciones significativas entre los medicamentos, e interferencia con la desintoxicación del cuerpo.Lancet, 3-5-97: Indinavir puede producir cólico renal y/o «piedras renales radiolucentes».Lancet, 17-5-97: los pacientes que toman inhibidores de proteasa pueden desarrollar con más facilidad retinitis por citomegalovirus. – FDA (EE.UU.), 11-6-97: un informe avisa de que la ingesta de inhibidores de proteasa puede producir diabetes o empeorar a quienes ya la tienen.

Estudios clínicos han ido confirmando que los pacientes que no toman los antivirales gozan de mejor salud:– JAY LEVY, The Lancet, 1998: «Todos los sobrevivientes a largo término del VIH han evitado los antirretrovirales».– CANDOTTI y otros, Journal of Medical Medicine, 1999: «De 68 no-progresores a largo plazo (más de 10 años) ninguno estaba en terapia antirretroviral».– HOGERVORST y otros, Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1996: «Ninguno de los enfermos asintomáticos a largo plazo recibió ningún medicamento antiviral durante el estudio».– MONTEFIORI y otros, Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1997: «Con excepción de dos entre 19 pacientes no-progresores, ninguno había recibido terapia antirretroviral».– REISLER, Donal B. y otros, JAIDS, 2003: revisión del historial de 2.947 pacientes tratados con Terapia Antirretroviral entre 1996 y 2001 con el objetivo de calcular la incidencia de episodios graves o de riesgo vital (grado 4) que no fueran definitorios de SIDA; resultados: 332 pacientes sufrieron «episodio de SIDA»; 675 lo sufrieron de «grado 4», es decir, a causa del tratamiento.Finalmente, un amplio conjunto de estudios recientes, que por primera vez analiza resultados a largo plazo con un gran número de pacientes en diferentes países, constituye por ahora el reconocimiento más dramático del estrepitoso fracaso de los antivirales. Apareció en la revista The Lancet firmado por unos 300 oficialistas, y en él se evalúan los resultados tras diez años de aplicación en 22.217 adultos seropositivos que comenzaron a tomar cócteles entre 1995 y 2003 controlados en 12 estudios de Europa. Canadá, EEUU y otros países. Resultados: «no hubo mejoras significativas en la respuesta inmunológica [...] ninguna reducción en ninguna de las causas de muerte [...] discrepancia entre mejoría en la respuesta virológica y porcentajes peores de la progresión clínica [...] nuestros resultados deberían ser generalizables a otros escenarios». FUENTE: The Antiretroviral Therapy Cohort Collaboration. «HIV treatment response and prognosis in Europe and North America in the first decade of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a collaborative analysis», Lancet, 368, 2006, pp. 451-58Con todo esto podemos demostar que la información falsa e incendiaria del sida está mal-interpretada.

Referencias adicionales:HÄSSIG, A.; KREMER, H.; LIANG, W.-X. y K.STAMPFI: «HIV – Can you be more specific? Open Questions concerning the Specificity of anti-HIV Antibodies: do they belong to the group of autoantibodies against cellular structures?». Continuum, 2, vol. 4, 1996.JOHNSON, Christine: «Whose antibodies are they anyway?». Continuum, 3, vol 4, 1996.KREMER, Heinrich: «Did Dr. Gallo and his collegues manipulate the «AIDS-Test» to order?».Continuum, 1998.LANKA, Stefan: «Fehldiagnose AIDS». Wechselwirkungen, 12, 1994, pp. 48-53.







Leave a Reply.