Wife didn't have to tell husband she had AIDS before marrying him.

[Ponce]

This is soooooooooooooooo wrong.
=====================================

Wife didn't have to tell husband she had AIDS before marrying him, rules court.

'Check out people's stories before you marry them,' says lawyer
By Richard Shears

Last updated at 4:54 PM on 3rd December 2011

A husband whose wife failed to tell him she had AIDS before they wed has lost his bid to have the marriage annulled.

In a landmark case, the Family Court of Australia said the wife's failure to inform him of her condition did not negate the husband's consent to marriage.

The court heard that the wife was in her 30s when she was diagnosed with AIDS in 2006. And the husband, who is in his 50s, said he would never have married her if he'd known about her condition.

Wedding: A husband has failed to overturn his marriage because his wife lied to him about having AIDS
The husband asked for the marriage to be made null and void, rather than dissolved, because he believed it would mean his wife would not be able to pursue him for a property settlement.

But the court said that he was mistaken in thinking there could be no property settlement if the marriage was found to be void.
More...Father who beat mentally ill wife to death with a flashlight after she strangled their son, 4, and tried to kill daughter, 7, is jailed for up to 30 years
Bridegroom started £6million blaze at historic hotel on his wedding night after rowing with owners over money

It is not known if the husband contracted HIV or AIDS.

Ian Shann, a family law expert, said the moral of the case was simple: 'Check out people's stories before you marry them.'

He did not think there was much difference between lying about health, financial circumstances or financial intentions.

Virus: The husband thought his wife's deception about her illness should be a grounds for annulment
It is believed that in the closed court hearing in Melbourne the husband had used a clause in the Marriage Act that says a a marriage is void in the event that the consent of either parties is not a real consent because 'it was obtained by fraud.'

Mr Shann said the grounds for getting a decree of nullity included bigamy, being too young to be married, being in a phoney marriage, being pressured into a marriage and a case of fraud such as mistaken identity.

'This particularly case did not fall within any of those circumstances,' he told the Herald Sun newspaper.

'But the wife clearly lied and the husband was clearly placed in a precarious position because of the lie.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2069566/Wife-didnt-tell-husband-AIDS-marrying-rules-court.html#ixzz1fX4AXRbR

[Shami-Amourae]

HIV/AIDs doesn't exist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwgmzbnckII

[Glass]

Strange things going with this disease down here. This guys appear to have told his partners and he is in trouble. Does a wife get a free pass on disclosure?



Circus acrobat accused of spreading HIV appeared on Australia's Got Talent


Authorities fear at least 12 women may have been deliberately infected with the HIV virus by a Zimbabwe-born circus acrobat.

Australian citizen Godfrey Zaburoni, 31, appeared in a Sydney court yesterday for an extradition hearing and is due to appear in the Southport Magistrates Court today.

Queensland chief health officer Dr Jeannette Young urged any women who had had unprotected sex with Mr Zaburoni, who it's been revealed once appeared on Australia's Got Talent, to seek medical attention.

Advertisement: Story continues below
http://images.brisbanetimes.com.au/2010/05/25/1506331/Godfrey2-200x0.jpg HIV positive ... Godfrey Zaburoni Photo: Supplied

"We're aware this gentleman has HIV and we understand he's had unprotected sex with quite a number of women across the country, so I'm here today to ask any women who have had unprotected sex with this man to come forward and be tested," she said.

Dr Young said Mr Zaburoni had given Queensland Health staff the names of 12 women with whom he had had unprotected sex.

She said seven of those were in Queensland, with the rest in New South Wales and Victoria.

"Unfortunately, he couldn't give enough detail so we could contact those women directly," Dr Young said.

"Any woman, anywhere in the country, who has had unprotected sex with this man should go and get themselves tested."

Dr Young said Mr Zaburoni had performed with "quite a range" of circuses.
Queensland Police Acting Deputy Commissioner Col McCallum said Mr Zaburoni, who has been HIV positive since 1997, would face two charges relating to transmitting a serious disease.

Mr McCallum said Mr Zaburoni was charged after one woman came forward to Gold Coast police.

"We received a complaint from a female in relation to her health and we progressed the investigation from that," he said.

"It is [an unusual case] - we've only had one before where a person was convicted for the offence."

Mr McCallum said it was thought all the women who had come into sexual contact with Mr Zaburoni were under 40Article @ the Brisbane Times (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/circus-acrobat-accused-of-spreading-hiv-appeared-on-australias-got-talent-20100525-wa5p.html)

So there was this story, then nothing......There are a few references to followup stories talking of a delay but they seem to be dead links now.

[Glass]

Then in October 2011 there is delays again... further delays. So it's delayed twice now.


Trial delay for HIV positive acrobat
THE case of an HIV positive circus acrobat accused of knowingly spreading the virus by having unprotected sex with two women is facing further delays.

The charges against Godfrey Zaburoni, 32, were mentioned in the Southport Magistrates Court today and set down for a further review on November 18.

The acrobat has been charged with two counts of acts intended to cause grievous bodily harm and two alternative lesser charges of grievous bodily harm.

Zaburoni remains on bail but his whereabouts have been suppressed by a Supreme Court of Brisbane order.article @ Goldcoast.com.au (http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2010/10/05/260681_gold-coast-news.html)

At least he is not locked up while this is going on I guess.

[Bigjon]

The basic message for all who show a positive anti-body test result of the "aids" never isolated, never seen virus, is don't take the cure and you will be fine.

It is the drugs they use that kills "aids" patients.

[Twisted Titan]

Same with Cancer.............

9 times outta 10 it is the Chemo and drugs that kill you.

Thats why they make sign a release before they dispense it to you

[joboo]

One night stand unprotected sex with a circus performer. You gotta be fuckin kidding me.

[osoab]

I wonder if the guy in the OP could re-file assault charges from when they were dating and hope he doesn't get a woman judge.

I am guessing he had a woman judge.

[Spectrism]

Since the legal system in Australia is at least as bad as Amerika, there is an encouragement there to seek alternate remedies for sticky situations. The woman marries the man bringing a deadly disease to him and he is unable to annul the marriage. Fine. There are other ways to end a fake marriage.

[solid]

One night stand unprotected sex with a circus performer. You gotta be fuckin kidding me.

That wasn't just one stupid woman...but 12 of them! Wow. Maybe the wife in the OP was one of these women.

Imo, if a person, man or woman, has AIDS and doesn't tell their partner, it's attempted murder. Both the wife in the OP, and that circus performer, should be charged with assault.

[Bigjon]

For the cool-aid drinkers here.

has aids since 91, still living still kicking, not buying the AMA drugs.



Born: 14 August 1959
Birthplace: Lansing, Michigan
Best Known As: L.A. Lakers star who retired because of HIV

"Magic" Johnson (Earvin Johnson, Jr.) led the Los Angeles Lakers to five national championships in the 1980s, then abruptly retired from basketball in 1991 upon discovering he had the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Johnson grew up in Lansing, Michigan and was a standout player at Michigan State University, leading them to a national championship in 1979 when he was a sophomore. He turned pro the next year and spent his entire career with the Lakers, including a couple of comebacks after his retirement and a short stint as a coach (the tail end of the 1993-94 season). During the 1980s the rivalry between Magic's Lakers and Larry Bird's Boston Celtics helped make the NBA a worldwide success. The Lakers won championships in 1980, '82, '85, '87 and '88. Johnson played in 12 All-Star Games, was the league's Most Valuable Player three times (1987, '89 and '90) and was a member of the USA's "Dream Team," gold medalists in the 1992 Olympics (after he'd announced his retirement). His enthusiasm for basketball and flashy play made him a crowd favorite and one of the most popular faces of the NBA. Now he's occasionally on TV as a sports analyst and busy running Magic Johnson Enterprises, a collection of business interests that includes movie theaters, restaurants and fitness centers.

Johnson, at 6' 9", was the biggest point guard in the NBA... In his career he scored 17,707 points, retrieved 6,559 rebounds and made 10,141 assists... He was inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 2002.

[Glass]

That wasn't just one stupid woman...but 12 of them! Wow. Maybe the wife in the OP was one of these women.

Imo, if a person, man or woman, has AIDS and doesn't tell their partner, it's attempted murder. Both the wife in the OP, and that circus performer, should be charged with assault.

I think it's interesting that the Acrobat's case keeps getting delayed. I wonder what for? Lack of evidence perhaps?

[midnight rambler]

One surefire way to avoid having to get a marriage 'annulled' is to not get into a contract with the state.

[Twisted Titan]

Wedding: a cermony where you stand in front of your creator making a pledge of love and fidelity to your mate.


Marriage: a business agreement between you, your spouse and THE STATE where The State occupys the superior postion in all transactions that occur in the business.



Known the difference.

[Old Herb Lady]

If it was the other way around & he would've had AIDS , she would have gotten the annulment, his life's savings & his scrotum on a silver platter.

[JDRock]

HIV/AIDs doesn't exist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwgmzbnckII
explain please...

[General of Darkness]

If you sleep with dogs you'll catch fleas. ;)

[Bigjon]

explain please...

They drank the AMA cool-aid and took the medicine that killed them.

[Ponce]

If you sleep with dogs you'll catch fleas. ;)

No wonder I itch so much everytime that I leave this site........scrach, scrach, scrach.......pretty soon I'll be howling like a dog.

[Shami-Amourae]

explain please...
You basically have to watch it to understand it. It makes the entire argument in the documentary that HIV/AIDs doesn't exist. It was invented to shut a bunch of gay people up who were drug overdosing. One thing led to another and gay people were screaming homophobia so the medical community came up with a "solution", made tons of money, and then classified the "gay disease" as HIV/AIDs.

It's basically just a giant misunderstanding that turned into an profitable industry for the medical establishment. In the West people die from it from taking the medication which destroys the liver. In Africa people are dying of other reasons (malnutrition, malaria, lack of clean water,) but you have these doctors who are trained to just look at people, or ask if they are gay or not, and if they are they have HIV/AIDs.

HIV/AIDs is a VERY BIG, but simple lie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie), but everyone believes it since the 'experts' say so. I think you all know what Hitler said about those kinds of things.

[mamboni]

As far as I know, there is an HIV retrovirus and it has been conslusively linked to the causation of AIDS. But, I am not an expert virologist/epidemiologist. I have cared for dying AIDS patients and it was beyond tragic to lose such young men in the prime of life to this mysterious debilitating and fatal disease.

On a different subject, I think the OP's story is another argument against legal marriage. I think young people have to be insane to get a marriage license today because they place their private relationship in the purview of a capricious and predatory court system. For example, when my wife and I applied for a license in 1984, we were required by law to have a blood test called VDRL to rule out syphilis. The public law had deemed it necessary to prevent the spread of syphilis at the wedding altar. So be it. But syphilis is far less dangerous and debilitating than HIV. Yet the court in the OP post didn't see a problem with the wife concealing her pre-existing HIV infection from her future husband. This is a glaring inconsistency. Courts are engaged in the exercising of capricious and arbitrary power - a legalistic tyranny. Free men need to avoid them at all costs.

[EE_]

This talk of applying for a licenses cheapens the bond between a man and women.
I think a marriage license should be like a drivers license, it expires every few years. If you don't get it renewed, you don't get to drive...in this case, be married.
Even better, make it like license plates, renew every year.

[dys]

If a man did the same thing to a woman they would lock him up and throw away the key.

dys

[Bigjon]

You basically have to watch it to understand it. It makes the entire argument in the documentary that HIV/AIDs doesn't exist. It was invented to shut a bunch of gay people up who were drug overdosing. One thing led to another and gay people were screaming homophobia so the medical community came up with a "solution", made tons of money, and then classified the "gay disease" as HIV/AIDs.

It's basically just a giant misunderstanding that turned into an profitable industry for the medical establishment. In the West people die from it from taking the medication which destroys the liver. In Africa people are dying of other reasons (malnutrition, malaria, lack of clean water,) but you have these doctors who are trained to just look at people, or ask if they are gay or not, and if they are they have HIV/AIDs.

HIV/AIDs is a VERY BIG, but simple lie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie), but everyone believes it since the 'experts' say so. I think you all know what Hitler said about those kinds of things.

At the start of the video, it pointed out that the CDC was desperate to find a new source of funding, a new virus, a new disease and aids filled the bill. Soon after there were billions in grants to find the cure for aids and the CDC was saved.

First and foremost allopathic medicine is a business, where curing people plays second fiddle to treating people and with any luck they get to treat them for a long time before they kill them.

[JDRock]

You basically have to watch it to understand it. It makes the entire argument in the documentary that HIV/AIDs doesn't exist. It was invented to shut a bunch of gay people up who were drug overdosing. One thing led to another and gay people were screaming homophobia so the medical community came up with a "solution", made tons of money, and then classified the "gay disease" as HIV/AIDs.

It's basically just a giant misunderstanding that turned into an profitable industry for the medical establishment. In the West people die from it from taking the medication which destroys the liver. In Africa people are dying of other reasons (malnutrition, malaria, lack of clean water,) but you have these doctors who are trained to just look at people, or ask if they are gay or not, and if they are they have HIV/AIDs.

HIV/AIDs is a VERY BIG, but simple lie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lie), but everyone believes it since the 'experts' say so. I think you all know what Hitler said about those kinds of things.

thanx i was on a work computer that didnt show any other info but your text .

[Bigjon]

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/kmreason.htm

WHAT CAUSES AIDS?
It's An Open Question

By Charles A. Thomas Jr., Kary B. Mullis, & Phillip E. Johnson

Reason June 1994


Most people believe they know what causes AIDS. For a decade, scientist, government officials, physicians, journalists, public-service ads, TV shows, and movies have told them that AIDS is caused by a retrovirus called HIV. This virus supposedly infects and kills the "T-cells" of the immune system, leading to an inevitably, fatal immune deficiency after an asymptomatic period that averages 10 years or so. Most people do not know-because there has been a visual media blackout on the subject-about a longstanding scientific controversy over the cause of AIDS. A controversy that has become increasingly heated as the official theory's predictions have turned out to be wrong.

Leading biochemical scientists, including University of California at Berkeley retrovirus expert Peter Duesberg and Nobel Prize winner Walter Gilbert, have been warning for years that there is no proof that HIV causes AIDS. The warnings were met first with silence, then with ridicule and contempt. In 1990, for example, Nature published a rare response from the HIV establishment, as represented by Robin A. Weiss of the Institute of Cancer Research in London and Harold W. Jaffe of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Weiss and Jaffe compared the doubters to people who think that bad air causes malaria. "We have . . . been told," they wrote, "that the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) originates from outer space, or as a genetically engineered virus for germ warfare which was tested in prisoners and spread from them. Peter H. Duesberg's proposition that HIV is not the cause of AIDS at all is, to our minds, equally absurd." Viewers of ABC's 1993 Day One special on the cause of AIDS-almost the only occasion on which network television has covered the controversy-saw Robert Gallo, the leading exponent of the HIV theory, stomp away from the microphone in a rage when asked to respond to the views of Gilbert and Duesberg.

Such displays of rage and ridicule are familiar to those who question the HIV theory of AIDS. Ever since 1984, when Gallo announced the discovery of what the newspapers call "HIV, the virus that causes AIDS," at a government press conference, the HIV theory has been the basis of all scientific work on AIDS. If the theory is mistaken, billions of dollars have been wasted-and immense harm has been done to persons who have tested positive for antibodies to HIV and therefore have been told to expect an early and painful death. The furious reactions to the suggestion that a colossal mistake may have been made are not surprising, given that the credibility of the biomedical establishment is at stake. It is time to think about the unthinkable, however, because there are at least three reasons for doubting the official theory that HIV causes AIDS.

First, after spending billions of dollars, HIV researchers are still unable to explain how HIV, a conventional retrovirus with a very simple genetic organization, damages the immune system, much less how to stop it. The present stalemate contrasts dramatically with the confidence expressed in 1984. At that time Gallo thought the virus killed cells directly by infecting them, and U.S. government officials predicted a vaccine would be available in two years. Ten years later no vaccine is in sight, and the certainty about how the virus destroys the immune system has dissolved in confusion.

Second, in the absence of any agreement about how HIV causes AIDS, the only evidence that HIV does cause AIDS is correlation. The correlation is imperfect at best, however. There are many cases of persons with all the symptoms of AIDS who do not have any HIV infection. There are also many cases of persons who have been infected by HIV for more than a decade and show no signs of illness.

Third, predictions based on the HIV theory have failed spectacularly. AIDS in the United States and Europe has not spread through the general population. Rather, it remains almost entirely confined to the original risk groups, mainly sexually promiscuous gay men and drug abusers. The number of HIV-infected Americans has remained constant for years instead of increasing rapidly as predicted, which suggests that HIV is an old virus that has been with us for centuries without causing an epidemic.

No one disputes what happens in the early stages of HIV infection. As other viruses do, HIV multiplies rapidly, and it sometimes is accompanied by a mild, flulike illness. At this stage, while the virus is present in great quantity and causing at most mild illness in the ordinary way, it does no observable damage to the immune system. On the contrary, the immune system rallies as it is supposed to do and speedily reduces the virus to negligible levels. Once this happens, the primary infection is over. If HIV does destroy the immune system, it does so years after the immune system has virtually destroyed it. By then the virus typically infects very few of the immune system' s T-cells.

Before these facts were well understood, Robert Gallo and his followers insisted that the virus does its damage by directly infecting and killing cells. In his 1991 autobiography, Gallo ridiculed HIV discoverer Luc Montagnier's view that the virus causes AIDS only in the company of as yet undiscovered "cofactors." Gallo argued that "multifactorial is multi-ignorance" and that, because being infected by HIV was "like being hit by a truck," there was no need to look for additional causes or indirect mechanisms of causation.

All that has changed. As Warner C. Greene, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, explained in the September 1993 Scientific American, researchers are increasingly abandoning the direct cell-killing theory because HIV does not infect enough cells: "Even in patients in the late stages of HIV infection with very low blood T4 cell counts, the proportion of those cells that are producing HIV is tiny-about one in 40. In the early stages of chronic infection, fewer than one in 10,000 T4 cells in blood are doing so. If the virus were killing the cells just by directly infecting them, it would almost certainly have to infect a much larger fraction at any one time."

Gallo himself is now among those who are desperately looking for possible co-factors and exploring indirect mechanisms of causation. Perhaps the virus somehow causes other cells of the immune system to destroy T-cells or induces the T-cells to destroy themselves. Perhaps HIV can cause immune-system collapse even when it is no long present in the body. As Gallo put it at an AIDS conference last summer: "The molecular mimicry in which HIV imitates components of the immune system sets events into motion that may be able to proceed in the absence of further whole virus."

But researchers have not been able to confirm experimentally any of the increasingly exotic causal mechanisms that are being proposed, and they do not agree about which of the competing explanations is more plausible. When The New York Times interviewed the government' s head AIDS researcher, Anthony Fauci, in February, reporter Natalie Angier summarized his view as a sort of stew of all the leading possibilities: "It [HIV] overexcites some immune signaling pathways, while eluding the detection of others. And though the main target of the virus appears to be the famed helper T-cells, or CD-4 cells, which it can infiltrate and kill, the virus also ends up stimulating the response of other immune cells so inappropriately that they eventually collapse from overwork or confusion." No other virus is credited with such a dazzling repertoire of destructive skills.

Perhaps it is the HIV scientists who are collapsing from overwork or confusion. The theory is getting ever more complicated, without getting any nearer to a solution. This is a classic sign of a deteriorating scientific paradigm. But as HIV scientists grow ever more confused about how the virus is supposed to be causing AIDS, their refusal to consider the possibility that it may not be the cause is as rigid as ever. On the rare occasions when they answer questions on the subject, they explain that "unassailable epidemiological evidence" has established HIV as the cause of AIDS. In short, they rely on correlation.

The seemingly close correlation between AIDS and HIV is largely an artifact of the misleading definition of AIDS used by the U.S. government' s Centers for Disease Control. AIDS is a syndrome defined by the presence of one or more of 30 independent diseases-when accompanied by a positive result on a test that detects antibodies to HIV. The same disease conditions are not defined as AIDS when the antibody test is negative. Tuberculosis with a positive antibody test is AIDS; tuberculosis with a negative test is just TB.

The skewed definition of AIDS makes a close correlation with HIV inevitable, regardless of the facts. This situation was briefly exposed at the International AIDS Conference in Amsterdam in 1992, when the existence of dozens of suppressed "AIDS without HIV" cases first became publicly known. Instead of considering the obvious implications of these cases for the HIV theory, the authorities at the CDC, who had known about some of the cases for years but had kept the subject under wraps, quickly buried the anomaly by inventing a new disease called ICL (Idiopathic CD4+Lympho-cytopenia)--a conveniently forgettable name that means "AIDS without HIV."

There are probably thousands of cases of AIDS without HIV in the United States alone. Peter Duesberg found 4,621 cases recorded in the literature, 1,691 of them in this country. (Such cases tend to disappear from the official statistics because, once it's clear that HIV is absent, the CDC no longer counts them as AIDS.) In a 1993 article published in Bio/Technology, Duesberg documented the consistent failure of the CDC to report on the true incidence of positive HIV tests in AIDS cases. The CDC concedes that at least 40,000 "AIDS cases" were diagnosed on the basis of presumptive criteria-that is, without antibody testing, on the basis of diseases such as Kaposi's sarcoma. Yet these diseases can occur without HIV or immune deficiency. Perhaps some of the patients diagnosed as having AIDS would have tested negative, or actually did test negative, for HIV. Physicians and health departments have an incentive to diagnose patients with AIDS symptoms as AIDS cases whenever they can, because the federal government pays the medical expenses of AIDS patients under the Ryan White Act but not of persons equally sick with the same diseases who test negative for HIV antibodies.

The claimed correlation between HIV and AIDS is flawed at an even more fundamental level, however. Even if the "AIDS test" were administered in every case, the tests are unreliable. Authoritative papers in both Bio/Technology (June 1993) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (November 27, 1991) have shown that the tests are not standardized and give many "false positives" because they react to substances other than HIV antibodies. Even if that were not the case, the tests at best confirm the presence of antibodies and not the virus itself, much less the virus in an active, replicating state. Antibodies typically mean that the body has fought off a viral infection, and they may persist long after the virus itself has disappeared from the body. Since it is often difficult to find live virus even in the bodies of patients who are dying of AIDS, Gallo and others have to speculate that HIV can cause AIDS even when it is no longer present and only antibodies are left.

Just as there are cases of AIDS without HIV, there are cases of HIV-positive persons who remain healthy for more than a decade and who may never suffer from AIDS. According to Greene's article in Scientific American, "It is even possible that some rare strains [of HIV] are benign. Some homosexual men in the U.S. who have been infected with HIV for at least 11 years show as yet no signs of damage to their immune systems. My colleagues . . .and I are studying these long-term survivors to ascertain whether something unusual about their immune systems explains their response or whether they carry an avirulent strain of the virus."

The faulty correlation between HIV and AIDS would not disprove the HIV theory if there were strong independent evidence that HIV causes AIDS. As we have seen, however, researchers have been unable to establish a mechanism of causation. Nor have they succeeded in confirming the HIV model by inducing AIDS in animals. Chimps have repeatedly been infected with HIV, but none of them have developed AIDS. In the absence of a mechanism or an animal model, the HIV theory is based only upon a correlation that turns out to be primarily an artifact of the theory itself.

In light of the importance of the correlation argument, it is astonishing that no controlled studies have been done for three of the major risk groups: transfusion recipients, hemophiliacs, and drug abusers. Two ostensibly controlled studies involving men's groups in Vancouver and San Francisco purportedly show that AIDS developed only in the HIV-positive men and never in the "control group" of HIV negatives. These studies were designed not to test the HIV theory but to measure the rate at which HIV-positive gay men develop AIDS. They did not compare otherwise similar persons who differ only in HIV status, did not control effectively for drug use, and did not fully report the incidence of AIDS-defining diseases in the HIV-negative men. The research establishment accepted these studies uncritically because they give the HIV theory some badly needed support. But the main point they supposedly prove has already been thoroughly disproved: AIDS does occur in HIV-negative persons.

According to the official theory, HIV is a virus newly introduced into the American population, which has had no opportunity to develop any immunity. It follows that viral infection should spread rapidly, moving from the original risk groups (gays, drug addicts, transfusion recipients) into the general population. This is what the government agencies confidently predicted, and AIDS advertising to this day emphasizes the theme that "everyone is at risk."

The facts are otherwise. AIDS is still confined mainly to the original risk groups, and AIDS patients in the United States are still almost 90-percent male. Health-care workers, who are constantly exposed to blood and bodily fluids of AIDS patients, have no greater risk of contracting AIDS that the population at large. Among millions of health- care workers, the CDC claims only seven or eight (poorly documented) cases of AIDS supposedly developed through occupational exposure. By contrast, the CDC estimates that accidental needle sticks lead to more than 1,500 cases of hepatitis infection each year. Even prostitutes are not at risk for AIDS unless they also use drugs.

Far from threatening the general heterosexual population, AIDS is confined mainly to drug users and gay men in specific urban neighborhoods. According to a 1992 report by the prestigious U.S. National Research Council, "The convergence of evidence shows that the HIV/AIDS epidemic is settling into spatially and socially isolated groups and possibly becoming endemic within them." This factual picture is so different from what the theory predicts, and so threatening to funding, that the AIDS agencies have virtually ignored the National Research Council report and have continued to preach the fiction that "AIDS does not discriminate."

Not only is AIDS mostly confined to isolated groups in a few U.S. cities, but HIV infection is not increasing. Although a virus newly introduced to a susceptible population should spread rapidly, for several years the CDC has estimated that a steady 1 million Americans are HIV positive. Now it appears that the figure of 1 million is finally about to be revised-downward. According to a story by Lawrence Altman in the March 1 New York Times, new statistical studies indicate that only about 700,000 Americans are HIV positive, and the official estimate will accordingly be reduced sometime this summer.

While HIV infection remains steady at this modest level in the United States, World Health Organization officials claim that the same virus is spreading rapidly in Africa and Asia, creating a vast "pandemic" that threatens to infect at least 40 million people by the year 2000, unless billions of dollars are provided for prevention to the organizations sounding the alarm. These worldwide figures, especially from Africa, are used to maintain the thesis that "everyone is at risk" in the United States. Instead of telling Americans that AIDS cases here are almost 90-percent male, authorities say that worldwide the majority of AIDS sufferers are female. With the predictions of a mass epidemic in America and Europe failing so dramatically, AIDS organizations rely on the African figures to vindicate their theory.

But these African figures are extremely soft, based almost entirely on "clinical diagnoses," without even inaccurate HIV testing. What this means in practice is that Africans who die of diseases that have long been common there---especially wasting disease accompanied by diarrhea-are now classified as AIDS victims. Statistics on "African AIDS" are thus extremely manipulable, and witnesses are emerging who say that the epidemic is greatly exaggerated, if it exists at all.

In October 1993, the Sunday Times of London reported on interviews with Philippe and Evelyne Krynen, heads of a 230-employee medical relief organization in the Kagera province of Tanzania. The Krynens had first reported on African AIDS in 1989 and at that time were convinced that Kagera in particular was in the grip of a vast epidemic. Subsequent years of medical work in Kagera have changed their minds. They have learned that what they had thought were "AIDS orphans" were merely children left with relatives by parents who had moved away and that HIV-positive and HIV-negative villagers suffer from the same diseases and respond equally well to treatment. Philippe Krynen's verdict: "There is no AIDS. It is something that has been invented. There are no epidemiological grounds for it; it doesn't exist for us."

Krynen's remark calls attention to the fact that AIDS is not a disease. Rather, it is a syndrome defined by the presence of any of 30 separate and previously known diseases, accompanied by the actual or suspected presence of HIV. The definition has changed over time and is different for Africa (where HIV testing is rare) than for Europe and North America. The official CDC definition of AIDS in the United States was enormously broadened for 1993 in order to distribute more federal AIDS money to sick people, especially women with cervical cancer. As a direct result, AIDS cases more than doubled in 1993. Absent the HIV mystique, there would be no reason to believe that a single factor is causing cervical cancer in women, Kaposi's sarcoma in gay males, and slim disease in Africans.

The HIV paradigm is failing every scientific test. Research based upon it has failed to provide not only a cure or vaccine but even a theoretical explanation for the disease-causing mechanism. Such success as medical science has had with AIDS has come not from the futile attempts to attack HIV with toxic antiviral drugs like AZT but from treating the various AIDS-associated diseases separately. Predictions based on the HIV theory have been falsified or are supported only by dubious statistics based mainly on the theory itself. Yet the HIV establishment continues to insist that nothing is wrong and to use its power to exclude dissenting voices, however eminent in science, from the debate.

Like other leaders of the scientific establishment, Nature Editor John Maddox is fiercely protective of the HIV theory. He indignantly rejected a scientific paper making the same points as this article. When Duesberg first argued his case in 1989 in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, the editor promised that his paper would be answered by an article defending the orthodox viewpoint. The response never came. The editors of the leading scientific journals have refused to print even the brief statement of the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis, which has over 300 members. The statement notes simply that "many biomedical scientists now question this hypothesis" and calls for "a thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis."

Such a reappraisal would include the following elements:

Genuinely controlled epidemiological studies of all the major risk groups:homosexuals, drug users, transfusion recipients, and hemophiliacs. The studies should employ an unbiased definition of AIDS. Too often we have been told that HIV always accompanies AIDS, only to learn that this is so because AIDS without HIV is named something else. The studies should be performed by persons who are committed to investigating the HIV theory rather than defending it. There is reason to suspect that properly controlled studies of transfusion recipients and hemophiliacs in particular will show that the incidence of AIDS-defining diseases is independent of HIV status.

An audit of the CDC statistics to remove HIV bias and thereby allow unprejudiced testing of the critical epidemiological evidence for the theory. Every effort should be made to determine how many AIDS patients were actually tested for antibodies and the testing method that was employed. Because even the most reliable antibody test generates many false-positive results, researchers should try to validate the tests by examining random samples of AIDS patients to determine whether significant amounts of replicating HIV can be found in their bodies. Statistics have been kept as if the purpose were to protect the HIV theory rather than to learn the truth.

Research focusing on the cause of particular diseases rather than the politically defined hodgepodge of diseases we now call AIDS. The cancer-like skin disease called Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) is one of the best-known AIDS-defining conditions, but leading KS and HIV experts Marcus Conant and Robin Weiss now say that dozens of non-HIV KS cases are under study in the United States and that KS is becoming much less frequent in gay male AIDS patients than it formerly was. Conant, Weiss, and other AIDS researchers now frankly attribute KS to an "unknown infectious agent" rather than to HIV, but KS is nonetheless still called AIDS when it occurs in combination with HIV. Duesberg attributes KS in gay males to the use of amyl nitrates (poppers) as a sexual stimulant. His theory is eminently testable, and it ought to be given a fair chance. Another example: Hemophiliacs in the age of AIDS are living longer than they ever did in the past, but they still often die of conditions related to receipt of the blood concentrate called Factor VIII. Research published in The Lancet in February confirms earlier reports that symptoms diagnosed as AIDS are best treated by providing a highly purified form of Factor VIII. Researchers should study the role of blood-product impurities in causing disease in hemophiliacs, without the distortion that comes from arbitrarily assuming that HIV is responsible whenever an HIV-positive hemophiliac becomes ill.

A critical re-examination of the statistics for AIDS and HIV in Africa and Asia. Researchers should perform new, controlled studies of representative African populations to test the relationship of confirmed HIV infection to the incidence of AIDS-defining diseases. It will not do to rely upon "presumptive diagnoses" or extrapolations from single antibody tests that are now well known to generate many false positives.

The HIV establishment and its journalist allies have replied to various specific criticisms of the HIV theory without taking them seriously. They have never provided an authoritative paper that undertakes to prove that HIV really is the cause of AIDS-meaning a paper that does not start by assuming the point at issue. The HIV theory was established as fact by Robert Gallo's official press conference in 1984, before any papers were published in American journals. Thereafter, the research agenda was set in concrete, and skeptics were treated as enemies to be ignored or punished. As a result, the self-correcting processes of science have broken down, and journalists have not known how to ask the hard questions. After 10 years of failure, it is time to take a second look. *

Charles A. Thomas Jr., a biochemist, is president of the Helicon Foundation in San Diego and secretary of the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis. Kary B. Mullis is the 1993 Nobel Prize winner in chemistry for his invention of the polymerase chain reaction technique, for detecting DNA, which is used to search for fragments of HIV in AIDS patients. Phillip E. Johnson is the Jefferson E. Peyser Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley.

Several replies to the article have been published, as a reply by the authors. You find them here.


VIRUSMYTH HOMEPAGE (http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm)

[Bigjon]

As far as I know, there is an HIV retrovirus and it has been conslusively linked to the causation of AIDS. But, I am not an expert virologist/epidemiologist. I have cared for dying AIDS patients and it was beyond tragic to lose such young men in the prime of life to this mysterious debilitating and fatal disease.

On a different subject, I think the OP's story is another argument against legal marriage. I think young people have to be insane to get a marriage license today because they place their private relationship in the purview of a capricious and predatory court system. For example, when my wife and I applied for a license in 1984, we were required by law to have a blood test called VDRL to rule out syphilis. The public law had deemed it necessary to prevent the spread of syphilis at the wedding altar. So be it. But syphilis is far less dangerous and debilitating than HIV. Yet the court in the OP post didn't see a problem with the wife concealing her pre-existing HIV infection from her future husband. This is a glaring inconsistency. Courts are engaged in the exercising of capricious and arbitrary power - a legalistic tyranny. Free men need to avoid them at all costs.

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/award.htm

Be the first and collect your reward.


T h e J o d y W e l l s M e m o r i a l P r i z e

MISSING VIRUS!
£ 1000 Reward



Blind romantics still believe HIV causes AIDS.
But if 'HIV' has never been isolated, what is
AIDS?

Never isolated? You bet! A cash prize of £ 1000
is offered to the first person finding one scien-
tific paper establishing actual isolation of HIV.

If you or a friendly 'AIDS expert' can prove
isolation, £ 1000 is yours. In cash. In public.

Interested? Pledge the money to your favourite
AIDS charity, why not?

We bet you'll be surprised to discover the truth.
c o n t i n u u m
CHANGING THE WAY WE THINK ABOUT AIDS

[Spectrism]

Whether AIDS is a virus or something else, it does exist. Many have died from it. Blood-born.

[mightymanx]

Food for thought:

http://killtown.911review.org/aids.html

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=33&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&p=1&p=1&S1=4647773&OS=4647773&RS=4647773

For fun read the supporting patent documentation links.

[Neuro]

Yes there is something very suspicious about an alleged virus that have never been isolated, after 30 years of intensive research, that supposedly attack starving Africans, drug addicts, homosexual men and hemophiliacs, and create very different manifestations in each group, but they all suffer from Acquired Immuno Depression Syndrome, and the industry that "manage" the victims is multi-billion dollars annually, any researcher who question 'HIV causing AIDS'-dogma is frozen out of community, funds, publication venues.

The facts are that individuals of all 4 groups tend to be immunosuppressed with or without antibodies against HIV...

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

Everyone knows where AIDS comes from!


1741

[Bigjon]

Whether AIDS is a virus or something else, it does exist. Many have died from it. Blood-born.

There are many different diseases the doctors call aids and people do die from them. It is for sure if you take their meds you will die.

I don't know why you say blood born, there are very few cases indicating infection via blood.

clip from the above article:

the theme that "everyone is at risk."

The facts are otherwise. AIDS is still confined mainly to the original risk groups, and AIDS patients in the United States are still almost 90-percent male. Health-care workers, who are constantly exposed to blood and bodily fluids of AIDS patients, have no greater risk of contracting AIDS that the population at large. Among millions of health- care workers, the CDC claims only seven or eight (poorly documented) cases of AIDS supposedly developed through occupational exposure. By contrast, the CDC estimates that accidental needle sticks lead to more than 1,500 cases of hepatitis infection each year. Even prostitutes are not at risk for AIDS unless they also use drugs.

[Bigjon]

Food for thought:

http://killtown.911review.org/aids.html

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=33&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&p=1&p=1&S1=4647773&OS=4647773&RS=4647773

For fun read the supporting patent documentation links.

This info presupposes that the never seen HIV causes aids.

[osoab]

At the start of the video, it pointed out that the CDC was desperate to find a new source of funding, a new virus, a new disease and aids filled the bill. Soon after there were billions in grants to find the cure for aids and the CDC was saved.

First and foremost allopathic medicine is a business, where curing people plays second fiddle to treating people and with any luck they get to treat them for a long time before they kill them.

I was about to post the same thing plus add a few things.

They change the definition of Aids at intervals that makes it all inclusive.

The people who give the aids test start with the least reliable results and using sexual history and drug use as strong indications of possible aids infection. This was really shown with the lady that was screening in Africa.

One thing that stood out to me in the vid was the all the Docs that were strong Aids advocates or researchers never gave evidence.
All responses were "I think" or "I believe" types. No hard facts.

[Neuro]

For Africa they hardly do any tests at all, if you're starving to death there the most likely reason is from HIV-AIDS you're dying...

[Old Herb Lady]

If you want to know the truth: it's all tied to the NWO.....
u might have to fast forward on part one to around the 3 minute or 4 minute mark.

(Dr Lorraine Day ties everything together.....NWO, holocaust hoax, AIDS, homosexuality, vaccines, etc)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkwx2Pv0o8s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5-FiG93BoQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxa0YB4-jb8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCfAaPJU8mU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxUNhnbLS4A&feature=related

[Awoke]

Tagging. Thanks OHL.

[Old Herb Lady]

1970 Pic of House Bill 15090 showing that the government asked for AIDS to be made.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20578136/House-Bill-15090-Actual-Document

[Old Herb Lady]

1963 U.S. Congressional Record revealing the promotion of homosexuality by the New World Order

( #26)............


http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

[Old Herb Lady]

bumpity bump 4 da night crew people that might maybe wanna listen to or read some sheyit !

[Serpo]

for OHL articles ............post 39.http://4funz.com/Funny-Pictures/animals/cats/img-bump-cats-5-125