Africa is being ravaged by the aids epidemic and preaching abstinence and condoms are evil don’t exactly help.
There is another take on the AIDS epidemic in Africa. It is all about diagnosis and the history of actually identifying the “cause” and therefore the treatment for AIDS.
Here is some more reading for you, that is if you are truly “interested.”
*In the US, AIDS is defined as a collection of 29 previously-known conditions including yeast infections, hepatitis, the flu, pneumonia, tuberculosis and Kaposi’s Sarcoma. These conditions are not known to be caused by HIV. Nevertheless, the one thing that classifies any one of these conditions as AIDS is a positive HIV-antibody test.
But even if HIV was found to cause these previously known conditions, a problem remains. The HIV-antibody tests do not diagnose actual HIV-infection. Instead, they look for non-specific antibody reactions in your blood to proteins in the HIV-test. The test manufacturers claim that the proteins stand in for HIV, but in reality, none of the test proteins have been proven to be specific to HIV. These tests are, in fact, so nonspecific that they cross-react with nearly 70 other documented conditions, including the flu, previous vaccinations, blood transfusions, arthritis, alcoholic hepatitis, drug use, yeast infections and even pregnancy, as well as conditions endemic in Africa: tuberculosis, parasitic infection, leprosy and malaria. Because no HIV test can actually find HIV, not a single HIV-test has been approved by the FDA for diagnosing HIV-infection.
In light of this nonspecific, cross-reacting test, how does the World Health Organization (WHO) diagnose AIDS in Africa?
Simple: they don’t require any test at all. In 1985, the WHO created a new definition of AIDS for African nations and third world countries. The WHO’s “Bangui Definition” allows Africans with common physical symptoms including diarrhea, fever, weight loss, itching and coughing to be automatically designated as AIDS patients, with no HIV test. But these very symptoms define life for the majority of Africans who lack essentials like sufficient food, safe drinking water, proper sanitation and basic medical care. These symptoms are also synonymous with the biggest killers on the continent: malaria, infectious diarrhea and tuberculosis.
Western AIDS organizations are working to get toxic AIDS drugs into the hands of African governments, but what’s the use of potentially deadly AIDS pharmaceuticals to people suffering from poverty-related diseases like chronic tuberculosis and malaria infection, or to pregnant mothers whose blood cross-reacts with the nonspecific HIV tests?
…What’s the main AIDS organization in Uganda?
Fiala: TASO - The AIDS Support Organisation. They claim to be independent, but they’re heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry. They’re currently constructing buildings to prepare the ground for massive HIV testing, with this non-specific, cross-reacting test, and to distribute toxic AIDS drugs.
In Africa, 50 percent of the population has no access to clean drinking water and the vast majority lack even basic medical care. And the response from multimillion dollar AIDS organization is to promote HIV testing, give out condoms and to implement treatment with deadly AIDS drugs. These drugs are similar or identical to chemotherapy drugs used in cancer treatment. They work by stopping cell growth. They kill your body from the inside out.
The above excerpt is taken from this article::
altheal.org/texts/liamscheff.htm
The entire article is an excellent read that gives the “other side” of the story. One not dependent upon multinational funding or politics.
What is also very interesting is how scientists, even very reputable, highly knowledgeable experts in the field can very quickly be ostracized and belittled when they do not tow the party line - the one funded by multinational corporations which have huge opportunity for profit.
Science, these days, is not about finding the truth, it is about profit.
The following is an interesting article about Dr. Peter Duesberg, who was interviewed in the above article. He certainly is no “respecter of persons” but he is also not afraid to tell the truth even when faced with repercussions from the science establishment.
discovermagazine.com/2008/jun/15-aids-dissident-seeks-redemption-and-a-cure-for-cancer/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=
:dts: