A quarter of a century after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.
In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations may have been misdirected, Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.
ADV. MALTHUSIAN EUGENICS VIA MISINFORMATION & GENOCIDAL MEMES 003 - Dr. Denmark Vesey- Fabricate Meme That AIDS Is A Disease Transmitted Via Heterosexual Sex
- Form Global Organization (Technocrats) to fight "Global AIDS Pandemic"
- Tax Populations To Fund said Global Organization (Technocrat salaries, "studies", propaganda)
- Invent Lie That "Safe Sex" Prevents AIDS
- Create Meme That Sex With A Condom = Safe Sex. (ostensibly sex with a condom would reduce # of pregnancies, accomplishing #1 Goal of Eugenics)
- Spend billions of dollars marketing false meme via the education system, mass media, MTV, music artists, medical doctors, and politicians.
- Allow real cause of AIDS & real preventive measures to go unexamined, unrecognized and unimplemented.
- Profit $Billions Selling Ineffective Drugs Treating A Non-Event (HIV)
- Cause the deaths of Millions of Human Beings Around The World With A Deliberate Misinformation Campaign About AIDS (Accomplishing #2 Goal of Eugenics)
16 comments:
What about the fact that more recent AIDS cases in the USA are a result of heterosexual infection, and among Black folks mostly? Recent analysis suggests that multiple heterosexual partners and a shrinked dating pool provide an environment rich for the spread of this disease.
What about the fact that more recent AIDS cases in the USA are a result of heterosexual infection, and among Black folks mostly? Recent analysis suggests that multiple heterosexual partners and a shrinked dating pool provide an environment rich for the spread of this disease.
Before we get into that Mandisa ...
1) What about the 25 year lie, that we were on the verge of a Heterosexual HIV/AIDS Pandemic ... WHEN WE WEREN'T?
2) What about the wasted resources, time, money and lives spent promoting a Malthusian Meme called "Safe Sex" ... THAT DID NOTHING TO PREVENT AIDS DEATHS?
3) What about the obvious idea that the people running the world's "fight against AIDS", have NO FUCKING IDEA what they are doing, and CANNOT BE TRUSTED?
4) If AIDS ... IS NOT TRANSMITTED VIA HETEROSEXUAL SEX ... in the US, Europe or Asia ... WHY IN THE HELL WOULD IT BE IN SOUTHERN AFRICA?
Where is all that "Scientific Method" you A Students who claim to "crack books" love to shout about?
Don't talk about it. Be about.
Where is the critical thinking?
Have you ever heard the strange and anomalous case of U.S. patient zero?
Interesting CNu.
What's your take on Patient Zero?
Haven't formed one yet brah..,
Me an the little boy were getting ready to go sledding this morning - and he had Dr. G Medical Examiner on. (lil dood seriously watches poker and forensics shows)
Anyway, I was gonna turn it off and they came on with the final segment set in 1968 in St. Louis about this 15 year old Black boy (who they cast in such a way that he looked like he could've been a relative) and so of course we had to watch it.
Peep it for yourself.
This morning was the first time I ever heard of it. Until I chanced upon this Dr. G episode, I was still under the impression that this dood was AIDS patient zero.
Where is the critical thinking? – DV
No where in anything you’ve presented.
Dayum DV, you’re in Evel Knievel mode on this one. You’re trying to leap across the Grand Canyon to promote your propaganda.
No where in this June/2008 article does it state that HIV cannot be transmitted heterosexually. It says that there is no longer a threat of a global HIV heterosexual pandemic. Certainly you know that “if a male is HIV-positive, his semen may contain high levels of HIV, even if his blood levels show low or undetectable amounts of the virus.”
Heterosexual transmission is clearly having a devastating impact on Afrikan American women.
[According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevent, AIDS remains one of the leading causes of death for African Americans in the United States. With regard to Black women in the U.S: AIDS is the leading cause of death for Black women between the ages of 24-34; Black women account for 69 percent of new HIV/AIDS cases among women; and Black women are 19 times as likely as white women to have HIV/AIDS and 13 times more likely to die from the disease.] Black Aids Institute
“It is important to keep this issue in front of African American women, who represent 70 percent of new HIV cases among women in America. African American women cannot afford to stay out of this fight. It is killing us disproportionately and we have to educate ourselves so that we can save ourselves,” -- Cheryl Cooper, president of the National Council of Negro Women.
And you conveniently omitted these statements:
“Aids still kills more adults than all wars and conflicts combined, and is vastly bigger than current efforts to address it.”
“Aids still remains the leading infectious disease challenge in public health. It is an acute infection but a chronic disease. It is for the very, very long haul. People are backing off, saying it is taking care of itself. It is not."
Obviously your obsession with conspiracies got you by the gonads on this one.
[A more recent work published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on November 1, 2007 dismisses this (Dugas) patient zero hypothesis and claims that AIDS transited from Africa to Haiti in 1966 and from Haiti to the United States in 1969.] -- Wiki
With the "discovery" of Robert R. the dots can now be connected from Afrika, to Haiti, to the USA (St. Louis), to complete the Fort Dietrich cover-up.
Testimony of Dr. Donald MacArthur, Director, Advance Research Project Agency, Department of Defense, July 1, 1969, before the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Department of Defense, considering Department Of Defense Appropriations for 1970.
[There are two things about the biological agent field I would like
to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally
exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.
MR. SIKES. Are we doing any work in that field?
DR. MACARTHUR. We are not.
MR. SIKES. Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest?
DR. MACARTHUR. Certainly not lack of interest.
MR. SIKES. Would you provide for our records information on what
would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be, the time and the cost involved?
DR. MACARTHUR. We will be very happy to.
(The information follows:)
The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:
1. All biological agents up the the present time are representatives of naturally
occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either for offensive or
defensive purposes.
2. Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might
be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.
3. A research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10 million.
4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the
field. Almost all are in university laboratories, and they are generally adequately
supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the National Academy of Sciences -
National Research Council (NAS-NRC).
It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such
research should not be undertaken lest it lead to yet another method of massive killing of large populations.
Funding was approved for FY1970 and the project, under the supervision of the CIA, is carried out by the Special Operations Division at Fort Dietrich, the army's top-secret biological weapons facility.
"No where in this June/2008 article does it state that HIV cannot be transmitted heterosexually. It says that there is no longer a threat of a global HIV heterosexual pandemic. Certainly you know that “if a male is HIV-positive, his semen may contain high levels of HIV, even if his blood levels show low or undetectable amounts of the virus.”
MB
Nah Nah Nah.
Pump your brakes MB.
This is school.
I'm not saying AIDS is not transmitted via heterosexual sex because "THE W.H.O." finally admits in a report 25 years after the fact that there IS NO CHANCE of a heterosexual AIDS Pandemic.
I'm saying it because I BELIEVE it's a myth.
Don't mistake me for one of these A Student Negros couldn't figure out they had to go to the bathroom without a foot note and a peer review study.
I don't believe HIV is the cause of AIDS.
I believe AIDS is caused by overall trauma to the immune system.
I suspect there are a variety of ways to fuck up your immune system.
Straight up heterosexual sex is not one of them.
14 hours of heterosexual sex on methamphetamines might do it.
But not sex the way God designed it.
AIDS patient zero was thought to be a homosexual prostitute and I mentioned him in another thread. The first case in Africa they think was a Bantu man in 1959 or so.
Heterosexual sex can get a person fucked up too DV. You are forgetting the whole gonorrhea, clamydia, herpes, syphlis etc. thingie aren't you? And if someone has sex when they have open sores on their privates, best believe HIV will go there too.
In this situation you are relying upon outdated information. There is a scientific basis for being concerned with heterosexual transmission of AIDS and the Blackest man on the internet ought to see that.
Black women, as MBradley aptly noted are the biggest growing population with AIDS in the US and represent the most cases in Sub Saharan Africa.
The biochemistry and virology of AIDS has become better understood in time; how it works by hijacking cellular machinery, how it hides out in the lymphatic system etc is enough to give anyone the heebee jeebees who has researched its mechanisms of action.
Learning about how HIV virus works does not negate the fact that it has a nefarious tone to it; that it seems engineered to target specific populations.
But you haven't shown AT ALL why the prevailing virology and biochem research is incorrect with respect to AIDS. You say that the AIDS virus hasn't been properly isolated but yes it has which is why universal precautions are taken by medical staff when they deal with fluids like blood, semen, vaginal, cerival, cerebral spinal fluids and the like. HIV is found in organs too, particularly organs that comprise the lymphatic system.
I don't understand how getting a picture for how this virus works in the body is 'plantation' behavior. And I don't understand how you can look data in the face and laugh at it like this.
Like I said before, you bring up valid points questioning certain medical procedures but not with regards to the ontology of AIDS.
AIDS is a lie. It is not transmitted via heterosexual sex. It is not transmitted via homosexual sex. The HIV virus that supposedly causes AIDS has never been isolated. What is called AIDS is a set on diseases that ALREADY existed, and which are exacerbated by certain lifestyle factors. People do not die from AIDS. They die from the medications that are given to "treat" AIDS. The so called AIDS epidemic in Africa is an excuse for allowing millions of people to die from diseases caused by poverty! There are not accurate tests for HIV and the tests that DO exist are not even administered to most of the AIDS patients in Africa. The doctors are diagnosing people who are dying because they are poor with a nonexistent disease so they can push population control measures on people that are considered "undesirables".
I have a friend who was diagnosed with HIV in 1982. After taking AZT for a few months, he refused all medication. he treats himself with diet, exercise and vitamins. He is in great condition. He has a new baby and a fiancee. He had been given less than 5 years to live when he was diagnosed 28 years ago.
And your expert opinion is based on what exactly?
The retrovirus now known as HIV was isolated by two separate labs in the U.S. (called it HTLV-III) and France (LAV) way back when I was in high school, so that must have been 1983 or 84. Not only has it been isolated, but it's been studied extensively. You need to get off whale.to, and crack a book.
Your ignorance is nothing new or notable.
Cool, a new link to check out and pass on! Thanks anon!
Expert opinion? Interesting concept. OPINION being the operative word. My OPINION is not based on any "expertise" on my part, it is simply my OPINION. And it is interesting to use the term expert "opinion" because opinion is subjective, and you would think that an EXPERT should have FACTS, not just an "opinion". Truth is, a lot of "science" is opinion, not facts.
You made a definitive statement: "AIDS is a lie." Therefore you are implying you have some expertise in the area, as your statement is a refutation of volumes of research and and almost 3 decades of clinical data.
Do you really want to play word games?
And you are incorrect, science is not "opinion" as you are stating it. You imply that it's based on nothing, as your statement is based on nothing. There's a difference between talking shit and saying what you believe, and basing a clinical opinion on observable data and years of experience in the field.
Look up the words Hypothesis, theory, and Fact and how these are used in the scientific community.
So I ask you again, what is your expertise? Virology? Molecular Genetics? Epidemiology? Infectious Disease? Hematology? Viral Oncology? Pharmacology? What?
I am just going to sit here and laugh.
If I was implying expertise, I would use buckets and buckets of words to put forth my thesis so that other human beings who did not have my same level of expertise could not understand and refute what I am saying.
I stated what I BELIEVE.
Post a Comment