Sir - The physician and Nobel laureate Albert SzyentGyorgyi said that discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought. It is in that light that all South Africans must judge the debate sparked by your President over the toxicity of AZT. Dissidents do not presume that Aids is a hoax or that there is proof that HIV does not cause the syndrome. They argue from an interpretation of the scientific data that there is still no proof that HIV does cause Aids. And, like it or not, this assertion is correct. It is impossible to search the literature and find papers that suggest otherwise.
      No better example of the problematic nature of the HIV theory of Aids comes from data obtained by Dr Robert Gallo, the US codiscoverer of HIV. In 1985 he found that blood specimens from twothirds of a group of 75 healthy, sevenyearold Ugandan children were HIVpositive. But the blood he tested was collected 13 years earlier in 1972 for a study on something completely unrelated to Aids (Science 1985; 227:10361038). So, Ugandan kids, infected by a similar proportion of their adult parents, with no treatment and without Aids, were alive seven years later?
      In the West, even these days, any regime that produced such a result would be cause for rejoicing. If these data are explicable in terms of HIV, then why is there anyone left alive in Uganda? Thus maybe the HIV test is just plain wrong and picks up antibody signals to things it shouldn't?
      Since onequarter of nonHIVinfected, healthy blood donors in Australia have at least one antibody that reacts in this test, it is hardly surprising that Africans, with their exposure to all manner of foreign and infectious agents such as malaria and TB, might have one or two antibodies themselves. Yet an Australian citizen must have four antibodies to be infected while an African is judged infected on just two.
      Is this a virus that does not discriminate? And why does the World Health Organisation define Aids for Africans such that anyone with fever, cough and diarrhoea for 31 days, without any blood tests, is a case? An Australian would sue their doctor for such presumptuous sloppiness.
      Your President is right to question AZT because it is toxic but, more importantly, because, as we illustrate in our 1999 paper (www.librapharm.co.uk/cmro/vol15/supplement/main.htm ), AZT is not metabolised to an active form in sufficient quantities to have an antiHIV effect. As also proven by its failure to lower the viral load.
      However, AZT is just the tip of the HIV/Aids iceberg. Experts have admitted that diseases and conditions have long existed in Africa that cause immune deficiency. Did all the traditional problems leading to these diseases suddenly evaporate in 1981, to be replaced by an allencompassing virus? Have the overcrowding, poverty, lack of sanitation, lack of doctors and medicines all disappeared ?
      And what of this virus? Viruses are proven to exist by isolating them from diseased individuals. But noone has yet achieved this feat. As the US National Cancer Institute itself showed in 1997, it is impossible to obtain pure HIV (Virology 1997; 230:134144).
      Purified virus is in fact 99,9% cellular debris along with a few particles that barely resemble retroviruses. And without pure HIV, how can one obtain the virus proteins and RNA needed to do the tests?
      It gets even more arcane. In 1997 Prof Luc Montagnier admitted that in the material he purified and presented to the world in 1983 as the discovery of HIV, there were no retrovirus particles. (I have a copy of this video and the text is at www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/dtinterviewlm.htm ).
      The overriding concern for politicians is the responsibility of looking after the country and the people. They do not wish to tell people there is nothing to worry about if there is, or not to treat patients with the best possible methods. And who can blame them for finding it extremely difficult to believe after all this time that there might be a problem with the HIV theory? It is a significant step merely to acknowledge such a possibility. Even in private. To get up and say it in a small group, let alone a whole country, is a gigantic step.
      Only a handful of experts have spent the time requisite to study the relevant data. Virtually all others who accept the HIV theory do so based on faith in those experts.

Valendar F Turner, Consultant emergency physician, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Western Australia. vturner@cyllene.uwa.edu.au

TORONTO

tel/fax:(416) 406-HEAL

INDEX

Search our web site (400+ pages)

Site search Web search   search tips