Re: Clark's protocol and HIV/AIDS

I see you are still clueless when it comes to medicine. You ask a lot of questions when you clearly do not know the answers yourself. This is evidenced by the fact that you think PCR can detect a virus. This IS NOT the case. PCR amplifies SEGEMENTS of genetic material, not whole virus. These segments are shared by other microbes. Look this fact up on Medline. They even admit that doctors often cannot agree with what is being amplified. And this does not even take in to account problems like product carry over, calibration, operator knowledge, etc.

As for HIV being classified as a leukemia virus, that is a fact. Look up the definition of the original name. Though you are also overlooking some other pretty obvious things. First of all whether or not the virus actually exists. As others have pointed out the virus has not been isolated. Amplifying a small fragment of some virus and calling it HIV is not proof of a new virus. Secondly, humans are not the only animals that have cancer viruses. According to the scientists the HIV virus is most closely related to bovine and ovine viruses. Many animal viruses DO NOT cause diseases in man.

As for people surviving 20 years, I should have been more clear to have said with AIDS, not HIV. There is a major difference. People tend to clump the two together thinking that HIV+ and AIDS are one in the same. They are not. AIDS is a syndrome, not a disease. Therefore, there is more than one cause of AIDS. One of those causes is the drug AZT, which collapses the immune system by destroying the bone marrow. Again, easily verified with a little research. Why do you suppose so many people with full blown AIDS test HIV-? I see you talking a lot trying to sound impressive with a lot a fancy words, but without any substance. In other words without a real understanding of what you are babbling about and definitely without any evidence. It is a well known fact that AZT destroys the bone marrow. Do you deny that destroying the bone marrow will collapse the immune system, including dropping CD4 counts? If you disagree with this fact then you are a complete m*o*o*n. If you agree with this fact then how can you deny that AZT causes AIDS? Of course unless you are one of those idiots calling themselves AIDS experts that keep calling AIDS a disease.

Tell you what. Why don't you get a little more educated about these tests then show us all proof that either the antibody or PCR tests can prove the existence and presence of the HIV virus. Of course you will never be able to do this because it is impossible.

While you are at it why don't you explain how it supposedly jumped from a monkey to man when SIV has only 43% of the genetics? Again, this is impossible! Viruses do not make those kind of drastic jumps in mutation. And where are all the intermediates? Guess what, they don't exist because Nature did not make it! And why did AIDS appear in 18 different countries all at the same time during the WHO vaccination program, and only in villages and individuals receiving the vaccines? And why were all the original cases in the US all in individuals receiving an experimental hepatitis vaccine during a vaccine program headed by a Russian doctor working for the NYC Blood Bank in the middle of the Cold War? You can look the original cases and their link to the vaccines in JAMA.

Instead of wasting everyone's time arguing about things you are clueless about, why don't you research the origin of AIDS. Start with the Bulletin of the World Health Organization 1972 and the Federation Proceedings 1972 where they discuss producing viruses that can cause the symptoms that fit the AIDS definition and go on to talk about introducing these man-made viruses during routine vaccinations in humans. You should also read the Congressional Record 1969, where the US government discusses funding a similar virus. A virus that was supposed to be completed in the same time frame that AIDS appeared. This is all documented. You just have to be willing to learn the truth!