Top Health Tools
Top Health Tools

Top Reports
Top Reports
 
Top Articles
Top Articles

Top Reviews
Top Reviews
   
Early Hepatitis B Vaccines and
the “Man-Made” Origin of HIV/AIDS

This article regards a matter of global urgency transcending better known AIDS threats. It describes a universal challenge posed by ever increasing numbers of plagues predicted to depopulate at least half of the world’s current human inhabitants within two generations. This documented science virtually proves, through the process of elimination and a review of the most updated evidence, the origin of HIV/AIDS as an iatrogenic (i.e., man-made) outcome of specific vaccination experiments.

Considered reflection on this AIDS science, along with the sociopolitical correlates and antecedents of this current catastrophe, reveals the likelihood that myriad other immune dysfunctions, autoimmune diseases, and cancers, including leukemias, lymphomas, sarcomas, and other ailments linked to viral infections, have resulted from previously engineered microbes that have by accident or intent found their way from cancer virus laboratories into humanity’s bloodstream by way of the most trusted public health preventative—vaccinations.

If what you are about to read is true, and each point is precisely stated and meticulously documented, beyond extensive depopulation, humanity’s very survival may hinge on this recognition, its implications, and our considered response. Especially relevant, when reflecting on the following facts, is the wisdom addressed by the late World Health Organization (WHO) AIDS czar, Dr. Jonathan Mann, whose life ended tragically on Flight 111 enroute to a European AIDS conference. “More than a medical scientific problem,” Dr. Mann said, “AIDS is a sociopolitical imposition.”

Background

AIDS is undoubtedly “man-made.” We can now assert this “very apparent iatrogenic origin,” versus the “theoretic iatrogenic origin” of HIV/AIDS because of the rapidly increasing, now substantial, scientific support for this conclusion. Currently, international scientific consensus among leading investigators in this field, many of whose works and words are excerpted below, holds that HIV/AIDS originated from one or more extraordinary man-made, not natural, events dating back to the early to mid-1970s. Especially implicated in initiating the AIDS pandemic, according to many scientists and scholars, was the hepatitis B vaccine as detailed in the following pages.

This may come as a surprise, or even quite a shock, to most people since the mainstream media and most respected medical journals have yet to herald the following knowledge. As a result most “authorities” still issue false and misleading claims such as: 1) “the HB vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS origination has been discussed, debated, and dismissed by an overwhelming majority of the HIV/AIDS research community;” 2) “People who claim that AIDS was man-made provide false information and hearsay;” 3) “It is sad that public attention and resources are diverted to attend to such unscientific dribble;” 4) “Man-made origin of AIDS vaccine proponents do severe damage to the public health community and vaccination efforts;” and 5) “Those that advance man-made theories of AIDS have financial motives,” as though there were no financial interests on the other side of the debate.

As a pro bono consultant contacted recently by Amnesty International (AI) members who desired to advance a resolution for the global organization to investigate this HB vaccine thesis, I was appalled by the amount of resistance and politicking performed by members of AI’s so-called “HIV/AIDS Task Force” which sought $1 billion of relief for human rights violations associated with HIV/AIDS from the U.S. Government. These funds, the Task Force reported, were urgently needed to buy drug–cocktails for persons with HIV/AIDS. Each of the five claims cited above were issued by members of this Task Force completely ignorant of the following science.

With regard to the first offensive claim, as the sole author of “Polio, hepatitis B and AIDS: an integrative theory on a possible vaccine induced pandemic” published by Harcourt Publishers, Ltd. of London in the esteemed international journal of Medical Hypothesis, this well-focused thesis has never been “discussed, debated,” nor “dismissed” by any consensus in any official capacity. Although Black Americans have been polled regarding the origin of HIV/AIDS being man-made, there has never been a published polling of the scientific community in this regard, and certainly not one regarding the HB hypothesis advanced below.

HIV/AIDS Origin Misconceptions Versus Science

Opponents of iatrogenic (or “man-made”) theories of AIDS have routinely confused hearsay and sporadic media propaganda with hard science, such as that “discussed, debated” and not “dismissed” recently at the Royal Society of London’s inquiry into the origin of this pandemic. They exclusively focused on the theory that contaminated polio vaccines triggered the HIV/AIDS pandemic. These proceedings were published in 2001. Quotes relevant to reasoned consideration of this unique/yet-to-be-tested hepatitis B vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS follow. These statements were made by featured presenters, all recognized leaders in this multidisciplinary field discussing the polio vaccine theory of AIDS origination. The first of these quotes is especially relevant to
proposed investigations:

“There should be an investigation by an international committee mostly composed of non-medical people concerning how a rather obvious and plausible theory [of AIDS’s origin from contaminated vaccines] came to be scorned and restricted from publication for so long, especially when important consequences regarding mankind’s worst epidemic, and even more important consequences for other possibly even worse that may be following, hang in the balance. As a corollary it should be studied why the hypothesis had to be promoted mainly by outsiders to science and medicine. The ressures towards investigation (and non-investigation) that emanate from huge drug companies and their influence in slanting research in subtle ways should also be examined, as should the role of journals and peer review in potentially obstructing publications of controversial kinds.” W.D. Hamilton, quoted by Julian Cribb in “The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: can science afford to ignore it?” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B (2001) 356:935-938.

“Faced with the terrible burden of AIDS, stories that HIV was introduced into Africa from the West by an accident such as OPV [oral polio vaccine] or intentionally by the USA Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) have gained widespread credence. . . . Nevertheless, because natural transmission repeatedly occurs, albeit on rare occasions, does not mean that contamination of a vaccine could not have been the route on another occasion. As with other infections, e.g., hepatitis B virus,natural and iatrogenic transmissions of retroviruses are not mutually exclusive.” Weiss, RA.

Despite studies that have advanced evidence suggesting an earlier than 1970 origin of HIV/AIDS, “[t]he fact that there were ten or so synchronous but distinguishable African epidemics is a definitive feature of AIDS for which the natural transfer theory [e.g., the “cut hunter transfer”] gives no convincing account. . . . To summarize these findings regarding the relatively large number of distinct group M subtypes: no set of likely natural conditions . . . will adequately simulate so many as ten distinguishable subtypes in a complex star-like configuration . . . . [T]he onus is upon the supporters of the natural [not iatrogenic] theory to account for the unexpectedly large number of HIV-1 subtypes. Exponential growth of the epidemic(s) is not by itself a satisfactory explanation (Hahn et al. 2000). . . . The likeliest source of the multiple subtypes and the synchronization of their conspicuous diversification is a punctuated origin [i.e., an iatrogenic event]. . . . [I]t is not far-fetched to imagine the ten or so clades deriving from a single animal (perhaps immunosuppressed and possessing a swarm of variants) [as might have been the case with chimpanzees used in the process of vaccine manufacture] or from a few animals that might have belonged to a single troop or might have been gang-caged together. The number of animals required is secondary to the extent of variation in the source at the time of the zoonotic [i.e., transfer of the virus between species] or iatrogenic event. The [vaccine] hypothesis makes a case for such a punctuated origin . . .” Myers G, et al.

“We conclude that SIV cannot become a zoonosis, but requires adaptive mutations to become HIV. Some modern event must have aided in the transition of SIV to HIV. Our research indicates that serial passage of partially adapted SIV between humans could produce the series of cumulative mutations sufficient for the emergence of epidemic HIV strains . . . We conclude that increased unsterile injecting in Africa during the period 1950-1970 provided the agent for SIV human infections to emerge as epidemic HIV in the modern era.” Drucker E, et al.

I might interject at this point that this conclusion by Drucker et al, although seriously undermining natural evolution theorists, reflects a myopic arrogance unbecoming to their otherwise reasonable hypothesis. Their conclusion neglects the risks inherent in the hepatitis B vaccine manufacturing and testing process as detailed below consistent with the analyses of Myers et al. Obviously, all of the above authoritative statements contradict “common knowledge.” The consensus of scientists at this historic British AIDS origin conference favored additional investigations into possible iatrogenic sources of the HIVs.

The 1959 HIV Sequence Discovery

In the interest of facilitating progress on this issue, much publicity has been given to the notion that HIV was discovered in a 1959 blood sample from Leopoldville, Zaire; and that scientific consensus holds 1931 as the approximate date of HIV origination. These superstitions have led to common, yet false, declarations that HIV/AIDS originated well before the polio vaccination era and the Special Virus Cancer Program (SVCP) that much evidence below links to the “punctuated origin” of AIDS.

For the record, according to the authors of the 1959 discovery, they never found, nor alleged to have found, HIV, or anything like a full virus. According to these authors, even “attempts to amplify HIV-1 fragments of >300 base pairs (bp) were unsuccessful, . . . However, after numerous attempts, four shorter sequences were obtained” that only represented small portions of two of the six genes of the complete AIDS virus.9

This is why Gao et al, referred to the 1959 sequences as “the oldest trace of the AIDS pandemic . . . although the precise timing and circumstance of early events in the SIVcpz/HIV-1 zoonosis remain obscure.” [Editor’s note for the lay reader, “SIVcpz” is short for “simian immunodeficiency virus from the chimpanzee.” This is know to be the closest viral relative to the human AIDS virus, HIV-1.]

Unfortunately, regarding the 1959 sequences, Zhu et al., left much room for misinterpretation if not wild speculation by stating that given the “‘starburst phylogeny,’ HIV-1 was probably introduced into humans shortly before that time frame, about a decade or two earlier than previously estimated. . . .” (Emphasis added.) They speculated the zoonosis might have occurred “considerably earlier than the late 1940s.” Obviously, this account is irrelevant to “the extraordinary synchrony in the 1970s of ten or more distinguishable epidemics” discovered by Myers et al. Therefore, this later group of researchers concluded that, with the exception of the 1959 sequences suggesting viral ancestry, “Clinical, serological and molecular retrospective studies have all failed to produce any evidence of AIDS or HIV prior to the 1970s.” (Emphasis added.) As Myers et al., had initially advanced, the early to mid-1970s “Big Bang” origin of HIV/AIDS is further supported by most recent scientific evidence.

As if repeating false assumptions would alter historic and scientific facts, many contemporary investigators, like those representing AI’s HIV/AIDS Task Force, continue to imply the SIV to HIV zoonosis occurred on or before 1959. Many natural evolution theory evangelists continue to cite the now disproven “cut hunter” theory to explain the origin of the pandemic. Reflecting on Zhu et al’s position, however, they simply concluded that the major-group viruses that dominate the global AIDS pandemic at present shared a common ancestor in the 1940s or the early 1950s. However, given confounding factors, including the likelihood of viral gene recombination during the manufacture and testing of the HB vaccine, like Korber et al.’s speculation discussed in the next section, the 1959 “isolate” may hold little, if any, relevance in determining the origin of HIV/AIDS.

Suffice it to say, no one has ever found a virus predating the SVCP and the late 1970s. At best they found fragments of what may have been the complete virus, but more likely pieces of a progenitor virus they called “a common ancestor” that dated back to “the 1940s or the early 1950s.” These and other portions of this “common ancestor” may have existed for centuries if not millennia. Again, this evidence is rrelevant when considering the 1970s “punctuated [iatrogenic] event” recently determined to be undisputable scientific fact.

More importantly, as Zhu and Ho et al., concluded, “the role of large-scale vaccination campaigns, perhaps with multiple uses of non-sterilized needles, should be carefully examined, . . .” as contributing to the sudden emergence of HIV/AIDS in North America and Africa simultaneously during the late 1970s.

Read entire article...


Reference Source: originofaids.com
December 1, 2009
Share/Bookmark
...............................................................................................................

This site is owned and operated by PreventDisease.com 1999-2014. All Rights Reserved. All content on this site may be copied, without permission, whether reproduced digitally or in print, provided copyright, reference and source information are intact and use is strictly for not-for-profit purposes. Please review our copyright policy for full details.
aaa
Interact
volunteerDonateWrite For Us
Stay Connected With Our Newsletter