3,244 words 
Leading the stimulant wing of the narcotic spectrum was the crack cocaine scourge that filled jails and hospital wards. Complimenting this was the slightly more respectable abuse of prescription drugs – rampant among tranquilizer and sedative takers. Such was the political impetus for leadership on the drugs crisis that the Democratic mayor of New York Ed Koch advocated the death penalty for drug dealers caught with a kilogram of cocaine or heroin.[1] Softer party drugs also joined the haze, most notably the club/sex drug class of alkyl nitrites, commonly called poppers. They were marketed as an enhancer of sexual pleasure, being especially popular among gay men because of the smooth muscle relaxant and blood vessel dilation properties that assist anal intercourse.
The principal consequence of long-term drug use is a feeble immune system. The biochemical wilting of a body’s immune defenses is then further compounded by the poor diet and sleep that accompany addiction. With the recalibration of the brain’s pleasure centers over time, food and relationships no longer function as adequate stimuli for these pathways. Chronic drug use therefore results in immunodeficiency; no virus is required. In fact, IV drug users have the same life expectancy (mid-30s) with or without HIV/AIDS. Up to 94% of American AIDS patients have a history of intravenous or aphrodisiac drug use.[2] Adding hemophiliacs and critically ill blood transfusion recipients (3%) to the tally derives a grand total of 97% of AIDS patients who come from abnormal health risk groups.
Homosexual men are greatly overrepresented among AIDS patients in the West. Duesberg argues that the reason for this is the multi-pronged chemical assault that is associated with the lifestyle choices of this demographic. Drug use is seven times higher in the LGBT community and correspondingly much higher among gay men.[3] This is significant, because when certain AIDS diseases are highly associated with certain risk groups, it beckons that group-specific vulnerabilities must be co-factors of causation at the very least. The classic AIDS disease of the 1980s was Kaposi’s sarcoma, a type of cancer beneath the skin that overwhelmingly affected gay males with HIV. It did not affect other HIV-positive groups like hemophiliacs or non-drug users, and became a rare disease as soon as the popularity of poppers waned. As it turns out, what had been a poster-disease for AIDS in the 1980s was narcotic in etiology, but used at the time for clinical propaganda and to reverse-diagnose Kaposi sarcoma sufferers as having HIV.
Statistics on homosexual promiscuity prior to the AIDS era showed that 43% of gay men had 500 or more lifetime sex partners; 28% claimed more than 1,000 partners – the majority of whom were strangers.[4] Such behavior imparts a significant disease burden. Anal sex is inherently more dangerous because anal tissue is one third the thickness of vaginal tissue, presenting a poorer barrier to venereal diseases. This is why many gay men are constantly on antibiotics, which debilitates their immune systems long term.
Hemophiliacs also suffered long-term immunosuppression due to the unnatural injection of clotting factor medication over many years. The grade of medication has since improved, but not before lives were destroyed by false diagnosis and AZT treatment. The diagnosis itself, whether true or false, increases mortality because humans are psychosomatic creatures. The stigma and despair of essentially being branded a sexual leper has led to ill-health and sometimes suicide. In the early AIDS years, the suicide of male patients was 36 times the rate of the general male population.[5] Most of these were freshly diagnosed people with no record of drug abuse and no symptoms of serious illness.
Individuals being convinced that they are ill (non-pathogenic disease) and succumbing to their belief has a precedent in animist cultures that employed shamans and witchdoctors. Bone pointing was an efficient method of execution among indigenous Australians for millennia. In modern times the difference is that the power to plant the kiss of death on a suggestible public now lies with the medical mafia.
In Africa, trust in the authorities on the AIDS issue is notably much lower than in the West. A good example is the former head of the National AIDS council in South Africa. In 2003, he stood trial on rape charges, admitting during trial that he had unprotected sex with a woman who he knew was HIV-positive, clarifying that he took the precaution of having a shower afterwards to “cut the risk of contracting HIV.”[6] The defendant escaped the scandal unscathed, both in a medical sense and a political sense, because that man was Jacob Zuma and would go on to become the country’s president.
Africa’s real problem, according to AIDS dissidents, is malnutrition and inadequate sanitation. The former causes a shortfall in appropriate chemicals in the body necessary for immune health, while the latter introduces toxic ones. Africa does not have a recreational/sexual drug problem, but it does have endemic poverty, tainted drinking water, parasitic infections and inferior healthcare. High rates of diarrhea, tuberculosis and chronic fever envelope millions in the lower classes due to basic factors of environment.
Since the African AIDS-defining disease rubric draws heavily from Africa-specific diseases, such diseases of hygiene are a proxy for assuming the HIV-positivity of millions of Africans as there are “limited facilities for diagnosing HIV infection.”[7] The gender and sexuality paradox that sees men, women, homosexuals and heterosexuals all at an even risk simply cannot be explained by the sexually transmitted virus model. Alternatively, the transmission of a long-established retrovirus from mother to child during pregnancy is sufficient to explain how an otherwise difficult-to-transmit virus remains widespread in the population. People infected with HIV should all have a similar risk of developing AIDS, but instead of this AIDS epidemiology exhibits extreme variance of over 100-fold range in the annual risk between groups; from IV drug users, to malnourished Africans, to normal HIV-positives (of which there are very few). This paradigm implicates non-viral causes.[8]
As early as 1982, the New England Journal of Medicine published David Durack’s claim that social drugs are immunosuppressive, and that the epidemic of amphetamines, crack cocaine and nitrite inhalants was causing AIDS.[9] Even after the HIV tail had been pinned on the AIDS donkey in America in 1984, a few months afterward prestigious AIDS researchers Seligmann, Fauci et al. (1984) attributed the AIDS diseases of Africa to traditional causes like malnutrition and poor sanitation. [10]
Nevertheless, for all the medical simplicity and empirical robustness of the chemical or lifestyle hypothesis of AIDS it was unfavored by the establishment because of its political incorrectness. Inherent in the model is the notion that the sufferers of this disease are to blame through their lifestyle choices and behavior. This conflicts with the socio-political view of homosexuals as a victim class. The hypothesis’ other fatal flaw was that it would not keep open the golden faucets of endless aid-raising, drug treatments and the search for a cure.
Critics of the legacy of decades of failed policies and predictions sometimes see a parallel with the cancer industry – the unjustifiably high price of drugs and the molding of a disease into a chronic condition that requires ongoing medication. When President Nixon’s War on Cancer expired in 1981 and researchers failed to discover an infectious agent of cancer, it seems that not all was lost for the handful of orphaned viruses suspected of causing illness but not yet linked to specific diseases. The opportunity to match one of the viruses to an emerging syndrome was thought to be just a matter of time and so health authorities wanted a head start.[11] The green light came with the large numbers of AIDS cases cropping up in the early 1980s among previously healthy individuals. The bureaucrats never looked back.
The National Institute for Health has refused to fund any research examining AIDS pathogenesis and progression outside of the HIV hypothesis framework. It’s under these conditions that the self-fulfilling distortion of scientific consensus is forged. Former drug developer David Rasnick summed up the multi-trillion dollar scientific-medical complex by musing: “You can buy a tremendous amount of consensus for that kind of money.”[12] Fellow Berkeley scientist Richard Strohman added: “Before the biotech boom, we never had this incessant urging to produce something useful, meaning profitable. The only way to be a successful scientist today is to follow consensus. Science has totally capitulated to corporate interests. Given their power and money, it’s going to be very hard to work our way out of this.”
Strohman was proved right. Industry now pushes so-called preventative measures in the fight against AIDS, which seeks to put people deemed at risk on anti-retroviral drugs even if not HIV-positive, let alone symptomatic of AIDS.[13] To this end, prominent public figures like Stephen Fry (a gay man who is not HIV-positive) are employed as activists. His predecessor, former NBA star Magic Johnson, advertised GlaxoSmithKline’s drugs and partnered with Abbott Laboratories for years to publicize the fight against AIDS in African American communities. Johnson has had to defend against skeptics of his condition and medication:
I do have it and have had it for [32] years, it’s just laying asleep in my body. The virus acts different in everybody… so just because I’m doing well, you might not do well.[14]
Every few years the media reports on a miraculous patient cured of HIV, or someone who has been “functionally cured” (meaning their HIV infections have been put on hold indefinitely).[15] But telling healthy people who once tested positive for HIV antibodies that they have since been cured of a grave disease is a bit like a mischievous parent giving their traumatized child’s stolen nose back to them.
A US Army study[16] reported that roughly 5% of HIV-positive soldiers “through an experiment of nature” did not develop AIDS for up to 20 years even without anti-HIV treatments.[17] The study offered no explanation for the AIDS-free condition of the long-term HIV carriers, nor did it mention the drug habits of the army personnel.
In 2009, an unprecedented move in academia saw a paper published in the English journal Medical Hypotheses retracted two months after publication – not because of flawed or falsified data but due to “highly controversial opinions.”[18] The paper, authored by Duesberg and four other prominent scientists, was a devastating rebuttal to a Harvard study that claimed South Africa’s HIV policies during the Mbeki administration caused 330,000 preventable deaths. The authors managed to obtain census data exposing the AIDS industry’s long running dishonesty over AIDS deaths in Africa, and released damning findings on the ineffectiveness of anti-retroviral drugs like AZT. In order to retract the published study, the anonymous forces of the scientific world had to fire the uncooperative journal editor.
In 1991, the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV/AIDS Hypothesis was formed from the signatories of an open letter by 32 top scientists to the rest of the scientific world. The letter raised several concerns about the flaws of the viral hypothesis and was submitted to the four major scientific journals. It was rejected for publication by the editorial boards, demonstrating that merely asking questions has become unscientific. The group, also known as Rethinking AIDS, would grow to 2,951 signatories at its peak, though some rescinded due to pressure from their employers.
Ironically, even the co-discoverers of HIV could have at times been classified as denialists, based on certain heterodox statements. Robert Gallo once suggested that HIV might only be co-factor rather than the absolute cause of AIDS.[19] Luc Montagnier went even further and claimed that people could get HIV many times throughout their life without being chronically infected, because a healthy immune system flushes out the virus in a matter of days.[20]
In 2014, the BBC reported that HIV was now evolving to become less deadly and less infectious due to anti-retroviral drug usage.[21] To an observer looking at the long-term epidemiology of non-progression and near normal life expectancy this might seem plausible, only it conflicts with Darwinian evolutionary pressures like drug-resistance and partial population immunity. For decades the AIDS establishment argued that mutation of more potent strains was the reason why they could not come up with a cure, or how there could be pathogenicity in a host after long latent periods.[22] The notion that retroviruses evolve to be stronger or milder over time might suit sociopolitical changes in epidemiology but the reality is that critical structural and replicative proteins of a virus cannot be mutated without denaturing its viability and compatibility with a host.[23] Even if mutation could spawn new pathogenic strains, scientists should be able to observe such strains causing AIDS within weeks among the newly infected. Empirical evidence does not support this, rather the functional properties of HIV among AIDS patients are identical to that of asymptomatic HIV carriers.[24]
In the natural world there are a minimum of 320,000 viruses affecting mammals[25] and almost 100% of them pose no mortal threat to a healthy individual. That the smallest and least complex among them is also an invincible long term hibernator virus is counterintuitive to say the least. Its slow immunological corrosion of several millions of people is stranger still, at odds with the fact that CD4+ cell depletion in chronic sufferers is highly unrelated to the effects of virus replication.[26] In the dry words of Professor Duesberg, “…there are no slow viruses, only slow virologists.”[27]
AIDS is the disease that nobody had heard of or understood until the 1980s, when Robert Gallo had his Excalibur moment and pulled the HIV sword from the AIDS stone. It’s the retrovirus that flew under the radar like no other, with its timely 20th century zoonosis and continued spread among millions who are not even aware that they carry this deadly virus. It’s the virus that likes to infect drug users and gay men in the West (but not sex workers or doctors), while being much more egalitarian when targeting Africans – also having a much lower rate of progression to AIDS compared with wealthier Westerners.
Not only does established medicine lack the critical mass of competent professionals and officials needed to revisit the viral hypothesis, its integrity is forged in a final pact of power over truth. Former CDC official Helene Gayle perhaps said it best at a closed Presidential Advisory Panel, when she told molecular biologist Harvey Bialy that if the dissidents were right, the government could never admit it.[28] This is the dystopian framework in which the establishment operates and the mainstream is hostage to – something out of a George Orwell novel. It is rather fitting that HIV/AIDS was launched in 1984.
The second Trump administration promises much with the caliber of unorthodox and maverick figures appointed to key positions. The scale of this shake-up could be anything from mere bureaucratic downsizing to the reevaluation of fundamental paradigms. Kennedy, in particular, leading the Department of Health and Human Services has the potential to effect profound change, but whether he pursues a mild version of his Make America Healthy Again initiative or instead stays true to his earlier activism is difficult to predict. Kennedy has been criticized for his vaccine-skeptic views, though interestingly his AIDS skepticism has been ignored.[29]
Commissioning an inquiry into the AIDS industry and its foundational principles is the least that is owed to the most controversial chapter in medical history and the many dissenting intellectuals among whom are Nobel Prize laureates. This clerical formality may be all that it takes to open the floodgates of an unstoppable torrent. The expression of political correctness in recent times is something that may, ironically, work in the dissidents’ favor. If the social justice lobby begins to realize that the disparate impact of AIDS on homosexuals and Africans over 40 years was the result of Western greed and incompetence, then the hunt for a new class of reparations will be on.
The inefficiency of the HIV/AIDS machine over its long tenure has only ensured that misguided officials keep it a well-oiled one. The US currently spends $28 billion a year on the domestic response to AIDS – something that the inaugural Department of Government Efficiency is likely to review. Kennedy will have the support of other unconventional thinkers and valorous characters, including Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, Kash Patel and Trump himself. The president is known to keep company with a number of eccentrics who harbor controversial theories, including popular broadcasters, Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan and Alex Jones, thus it is not inconceivable that he is sympathetic to such views and may try to shed light on some of the murkier arrangements between government and big business.
Notes
[1] Goode, E., Ben-Yehuda, N. (1994). Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance (1st Ed.; p. 197). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers
[2] Duesberg, P. H. AIDS Acquired by Drug Consumption and Other Noncontagious Risk Factors. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 55: 201–277
[3] Drug use ‘seven times higher’ among gays. By Sarah Morrison. 23 September 2012. Independent
[4] Bell, A. P., Weinberg, M. S., Hammersmith, S. K. 1981. Sexual Preference: Its Development in Men and Women (pp. 308-9). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press
[5] AIDS Patients Are Found to Have an Extremely High Suicide Rate. By Gina Kolata. 4 March 1988. The New York Times
[6] SA’s Zuma showered to avoid HIV. 5 April 2006. BBC
[7] De Cock, K.M., Selik, R.M., Soro, B., Gayle, H., Colebunders, R.L. AIDS surveillance in Africa: a reappraisal of case definitions. British Medical Journal, 303: 1185-1188
[8] Duesberg, P. H. 1992. AIDS Acquired by Drug Consumption and Other Noncontagious Risk Factors. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 55: 201–277 (Section 3.4.4.)
[ix] Durack, D. T. Opportunistic Infections and Kaposi’s Sarcoma in Homosexual Men. New England J Med, 305: 1465-1467
[10] Seligmann, M., Chess, L., Fahey, J. L., Fauci, et al. AIDS – An immunologic reevaluation. New England J Med, 311: 1286-1292
[11] Goodson, P. Questioning the HIV-AIDS hypothesis: 30 years of dissent. Front. Public Health 2: 154
[12] Out of Control – AIDS and the corruption of medical science. By Celia Farber. March 2006. Harper’s Magazine
[13] Hirnschall, G., Harries, A., Easterbrook, P., Doherty, M., Ball, A. The next generation of the World Health Organization’s global antiretroviral guidance. J Int AIDS Soc, 16:1–7
[14] Magic Johnson Calls BS on HIV Myths – I Don’t Have a Magic Cure. 11 February 2014. TMZ
[15] 14 Adults ‘Functionally Cured’ Of HIV, Study Says. By Amanda L. Chan. 16 March 2013. The Huffington Post
[16] Renzullo, P.O., Sateren, W.B., Garner, R.P., Milazzo, M.J., Birx, D.L., McNeil, J.G. HIV-1 seroconversion in United States Army active duty personnel, 1985-1999. AIDS, 15: 1569-1574
[17] Okulicz, J.F., Marconi, V.C., Landrum, M.L., et al. and the Infectious Disease Clinical Research Program (IDCRP) HIV Working Group. Clinical outcomes of elite controllers, viremic controllers, and long-term nonprogressors in the US Department of Defense HIV natural history study. J. Infect. Dis., 200: 1714-1723
[18] Paper denying HIV–AIDS link secures publication. By Zoë Corbyn. 5 January 2012. Nature (News)
[19] Duesberg, P. H., editor. AIDS: Virus- Or Drug Induced? (Vol. 5). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers (1996)
[20] Interview with Luc Montagnier [including extra footage]. House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic [Documentary]. Dir. Brent Leung. Knowledge Matters, 2009
[21] HIV evolving ‘into milder form’. By James Gallagher. 1 December 2014. BBC
[22] Hahn, B.H., Shaw, G.M., Taylor, M.E., et al. Genetic variation in HTLV-III/LAV over time in patients with AIDS or at risk for AIDS. Science, 232: 1548-1553
[23] Duesberg, P.H. Responding to the AIDS debate. Naturwissenschaften, 77: 97-102
[24] Lu, W., Andrieu, J.M. Similar replication capacities of primary human immunodeficiency virus type 1 isolates derived from a wide range of clinical sources. J. Virol., 66: 334-340
[25] Anthony, S.J., Epstein, J.H., Murray, K.A., et al. A strategy to estimate unknown viral diversity in mammals. mBio, 4(5): e00598-13
[26]Rodríguez, B., Sethi, A.K., Cheruvu, V.K., et al. Predictive Value of Plasma HIV RNA Level on Rate of CD4 T-Cell Decline in Untreated HIV Infection. JAMA, 296(12): 1498-506
[27] Duesberg, P. H. 1998, 2nd Ed. Inventing the AIDS Virus (p73). Washington DC: Regnery Publishing
[28] Baker, C. 19 July 2012. Book Review: Denying AIDS. Office of Medical and Scientific Justice
[29] Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the HIV/AIDS Hoax. By Ron Unz. November 25, 2024. The Unz Review
2 comments
The article needs updating, as shown by dates of references (most recent 2014, most direct Duesberg references from 1990s or eaky 2000s). For example, more convincing explanations are available for long term progressors or those who have been cured.
Sorry but were you were around in the 1980s and early 1990s when AIDS death rates were soaring, then dropping off? Now with that population of risk-takers replenished the death rate has not climbed to what it was in the 1980s and 1990s. HIV is gone? I think not, just controlled by medication. Viral suppression occurs in long term progressors who would have spread the disease. Reduce the amount of virus and spreading will consequently decline.
If black amerika was aware of this article, there would be another distracting side holler for reparations via mass agitation that we could exploit to our benefit and further hack away at the criminal nature of the medical cartels by shining light on this lie. Gay men and blacks being amerika’s darlings, such exposure could only help to rock the boat.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.