Non-Profit Trusted Source of Non-Commercial Health Information
The Original Voice of the American Academy of Anti-Aging, Preventative, and Regenerative Medicine
logo logo
Home » HIV and AIDS

A total lack of logic in tody's Frankenstein-type AIDS reserarch?

By hkugler at Nov. 22, 2011, 2:56 p.m., 3959 hits

While the “African AIDS epidemics” are based on estimates, analysis of African and Ugandan death rates and growth statistics suggest that 30% of 800 million Africans are surviving and reproducing at an enviable rate despite HIV.
While the HIV=AIDS hypothesis was never proven scientifically, 5,000 attendees at a drug company sponsored meeting, voting that it is so, expect health professionals to accept voting results over science.
While malnutrition – an African fact - is established as the strongest immune-hampering factor, the HAART pharma industry wants to feed toxic cytocidal DNA chain terminator drugs to these malnourished bodies to prevent HIV transmissions.
While the literature shows (94+%) that people who develop full AIDS have also abused recreational drugs, this fact, and the health improvements achieved by getting off drugs, are ignored in HIV-positives survival statistics.
While health practice improvements alone, that most people who were diagnosed HIV+ (and scared into taking countermeasures) are known to make, are equivalent to life span increases of up to 16 to 24 years, the drug manufacturers would like us to believe that coming close to achieving average life spans – observed in HAART drug trials - are due solely to the drugs.

And here comes a real surprise:
In respect to survival rates of European and N-American HIV+ and AIDS patients with HAART, there are, in essence, two types of peer-reviewed scientific papers:
a) Papers like the CASCADE STUDY, showing that HAART drugs give good life-span increases in HIV+ patients (1). And
b) Papers like the 2006 Lancet study that evaluated 20,000 European and N-American AIDS patients, and that reports that HAART drugs have 0 – zero – effect on the death rate from AIDS (2).
c) Both types of papers are, in the basic facts they report, correct, and there are no errors in their numbers.
How do you explain such discrepancies? That in the CASCADE-type studies HIV+ people start HAART right at point of seroconversion? And all this in the light of HAART drugs being cytocidal DNA chain terminators, and an ever increasing number of papers show mitochondrial toxicity of HAART drugs (1, 2, 3).
For all the details about the above quoted facts click on the AIDS poster at

1) Apostolova N, Blas-García A, Esplugues JV. Mitochondrial interference by anti-HIV drugs: mechanisms beyond Pol-γ inhibition. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2011 Sep 5. .
2) Apostolova N, Blas-García A, Esplugues JV. Mitochondrial toxicity in HAART: an overview of in vitro evidence. Curr Pharm Des. 2011;17(20):2130-44. PMID: 21718249.
3) Blas-Garcia A, Esplugues JV, Apostolova N. Twenty years of HIV-1 non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors: time to reevaluate their toxicity. Curr Med Chem. 2011;18(14):2186-95. Review. PMID: 21521162.

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2011-11-22 14:59:05 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2011-11-22 15:05:38 —

— Last Edited by Hans J. Kugler, PhD at 2011-12-04 00:04:16 —

No Reply