All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 1, 1993 - Bill Cooper
56:32
Alex Loglia, Germ Theory #4
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to the Hour of the Times.
This is Carolyn Nelson broadcasting from WWCR 5.810 MHz on your dial.
Well, I left New Hampshire on March 8, 1993 to travel across the country talking to people about our Constitution and the problems that we're having Facing losing our country.
I'm going to read you from one of the Bill of Rights.
You can guess the number.
Remember, there were twelve proposed amendments.
Ten of them were ratified effective December 15, 1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press,
or the right of the people to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I've had a few people calling in, and in relation to the freedom of the press,
you can call 1-716-876-7333 for more information about the problems in Canada
and the freedom of the press in America.
Bye.
I was going to read another amendment today about money.
You know, we've been hearing from Craig Smith on the new program that started tonight at 6 p.m.
Central Time called TRENZ.
T-R-E-N-Z.
Be sure to turn in Tune in and listen and learn more about money and the history of money.
Tonight we're going to hear from Alex Loglia again.
He will present his fourth episode of the series on germ theory.
This will be the second tape about AIDS.
I remember when I was working on Roosevelt Island in New York City Oh, in the early eighties there were about four or six hundred cases of AIDS and I used to wonder why in the world don't they quarantine these unfortunate few who already have AIDS and tackle the problem that way?
But no one did.
And now it's of epidemic quality.
However, Alex Loglia is telling us a little different point of view.
You can write to him at 217 Good evening ladies and gentlemen.
Street, Suite 246, New York, New York, 10028.
We'll repeat that later.
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
Back again tonight for my last installment on the subject of acquired immune deficiency
syndrome.
I've covered a lot of ground over the last couple of nights, both with the germ theory
and with AIDS, and tonight I want to bring this all to a head to get some points across
to you that are very important to me.
I'm going to read you a little bit more from Bill Holub's work and quote you some articles that are going to be supporting what I'm saying here.
I did back on show before last tell you that I was going to tell you about Africa, about AIDS cases in women and children.
So, here we go.
This is from Bill Holub, who I've mentioned enough for you to know already.
The evidence is overwhelming that a major factor in AIDS is chronic malnutrition, yet this is selectively ignored by the media and the medical community.
Figure 22, which is a picture here, you'll see, Describes the major clinical features of age, which also happen to be the exact same list of the major clinical features of classic protein calorie malnutrition, whose acronym is PCM.
Which is the only major disease process occurring in the underdeveloped countries and in the homeless, starving people of America.
Actually, the U.S.
now qualifies as a socially undeveloped and over-medicated country.
It is astonishing to note that all the symptoms of AIDS are identical to the symptoms of classic protein calorie malnutrition.
With regard to transfusions, the situation is similar.
Transfusions like immunizations or the introduction into the body of foreign proteins is a very potent immune challenge.
If this immune challenge is given to someone ill, malnourished, etc., then rapid immunosuppression follows, and remember what I told you In my show about vaccinations.
Thus, the chronic infection seen after transfusion, as is the subsequent immune depression, and the AIDS-like syndrome are due to other clinical factors and not to the HIV-AIDS virus.
Now, reading on.
Women, as 50% of the consumers, need to be duped into the AIDS myth.
The first few cases were described in women who were called, quote, previously healthy.
And yet, if you looked at their clinical history, you wondered what previously healthy means.
These women had long histories of drug abuse, chronic infections, anemia.
In other words, they were frequently sick and frequently medicated, and that is how they developed the symptoms called AIDS.
The media continues to whip up paranoia, fear, prejudice, and vengeful anger into the public maelstrom of AIDS.
There is the classic story of the two women who received transfusions who were later told that they would get AIDS and die.
One stayed well and medicine termed her lucky.
The other got sick and they termed her AIDS.
What would happen to you if you were told, and you believed it, that you were going to die and to keep coming back to the hospital for tests and treatments for years while you and medicine wait for the signs of the deadly disease?
Most people would probably get very sick under such stress.
There was also a sad testimonial to the media when a foster mother let her son die because she was afraid that he got AIDS in the hospital.
Children victimized by the AIDS medical machine.
In children, AIDS is detected and treated the same way as it is in adults, so the outcome is the same.
But the percent supposedly infected that go on to get AIDS is very small.
So again, other factors have been suggested.
In these children, the quote-unquote therapy is just as aggressive and just as lethal.
About 90% of supposed maternal transmissions of AIDS can be accounted for because the women are usually drug abusers and were very sick and very medicated before and after birth.
Remember, whatever a pregnant woman does to herself and whatever medicine does to her is also done to the unborn baby.
So this So is this really showing transmission of disease or simply continued toxic care?
Folks, in one study, children with AIDS showed the following associations when compared to a group without AIDS.
200% more injections, 31% more transfusions, 60% more surgery, 96% more vaccinations, 59% longer hospital stays, and 31% more transfusions.
Folks, this is the correlative data.
Meaning that the children who had AIDS had these co-factors.
Thus it seems that the more treatment you get, the more likely you are to get sick and to be labeled as having AIDS.
The media has put false fear into the public by saying that breastfeeding transmits AIDS even though the one quoted case had no evidence to show of any transmission.
We presume that the infant formula companies will love this propaganda.
Now, an unusual exchange occurred in the medical literature recently in which American medical people keep insisting that Africa was the source of the AIDS virus while African scientists Could not substantiate this claim.
There was no evidence of any significant positive test, and the test which did show positive had a high correlation to previously mentioned protein calorie malnutrition, malaria, Burkitt's lymphoma, and other diseases of chronic malnutrition.
These correlations are sufficient to explain the high rate of false positives.
Much misinformation and disinformation has been reported about AIDS in Africa.
Following a six-week tour of 26 cities and towns in 16 sub-Saharan countries, physician Felix Kotni-Ahulu of the Cromwell Hospital London observed that press statements were grossly exaggerated.
He found, quote, "...uppermost in the minds of intelligent Africans and Europeans was the question, why do the world's media appear to have conspired with some scientists to become so gratuitously extravagant with the untruth?"
This journalistic hyperbole has proved very expensive.
Africans overseas have experienced racial abuse, tourism has unjustly suffered, and tension seems to have developed between white doctors working in Africa.
Many whites with a fund of goodwill for Africa feel even more strongly than I do about the effect of the world's media on that continent.
Africa's only really endemic diseases are malnutrition, environmental degradation, social-political wars, poverty, poor hygiene, and unhealthy sexual practices.
Africa has the highest percent of the population suffering from chronic malnutrition.
That is about 168 million people, which is 33% compared to the Far East of 19%, Latin America 13%, and the Near East
12%.
Of course, if our government were honest with us, our country would be right up there with the worst.
The black African prejudice concerning AIDS may be shifting to the black American as race becomes an issue.
Witness a report claiming to find new abnormal facial features in children born to mothers tested positive for AIDS.
The report was subsequently shown to be false because the investigators did not realize that features such as flat nasal bridge, prominent forehead, prominent lips, and slanted eyes are observed with a certain degree of frequency in normal black and hispanic children and could hardly be considered abnormal.
Folks, I hope that gives you some idea of what's going on here.
The only real reason that we may be seeing AIDS in Africa, aside from what I have just read, is smallpox vaccination programs that were there a while back now some of the more radical people out there will tell you that the smallpox vaccinations were actually either laced with AIDS or were precursors of AIDS and personally from the data I've seen it's nonsense and from the data I have seen and the work I've done with vaccinations you do not even need a killer virus to be
put into these vaccines to create these kind of immunosuppressive problems and symptoms.
Folks, like I said on my vaccination show, vaccinations alone are enough to produce all the immunosuppressive symptoms in people years after they've received the vaccination.
That's fact.
I don't know anybody who'll argue that with you after they see the data.
Now, also from some of the data that my friend Bill Holub has put together First-year profits and sales for AIDS tests.
Let me just read you the company names and the profits they've made and the first-year sales.
ElectroNucleonics, 56.9 million sales in AIDS tests.
Baxter Travenol, 1.8 billion.
Abbott Laboratories, 3.1 billion.
CentiCorps, 10.9 million.
This is all first-year sales figures for companies that produce AIDS tests.
Now, Bill Holub also has some fantastic data, which I can't really go into in detail, but suffice it to say, through careful statistical analysis, he has shown dozens of other diseases that have been renamed as AIDS and shown you the number of lost cases of those diseases that have been renamed as AIDS.
I'm looking right at it.
It's a little bit too complicated of a chart to read to you.
But suffice it to say, folks, the data is here.
It has been published.
It exists.
It is documented.
It is very carefully referenced.
There's some other stuff here that I can read to you, which is interesting.
Other disease states of which can now also be renamed or reclassified as AIDS.
And this is from data from the Center for Disease Control.
Listen to what they are calling AIDS now, folks.
Tuberculosis, Salmonella, Any microbacterial disease, reticular sarcoma, any malignant lymphoma, any encephalopathy, any dementia, any weight loss, diarrhea, malnutrition, any recurrent or multiple bacterial infections, candidiasis, cryptococciosis, cytomegalovirus disease, herpes simplex disease,
Kaposi Sarcoma, Lymphoma of the Brain, Lymphoid, Interstitial Pneumonia, Mycobacterium, Avium Complex.
I'm not going to go on.
I hope he gets a picture.
I really hope he gets a picture, folks.
Let me read a little bit from an article from February 5th Times of this year of 1993.
It's titled, Epidemic of AIDS in Africa, A Tragic Myth.
And again, it's the London Sunday Times.
And this is by Neville Hodgkins.
I'm just going to read you some of the stuff I've underlined just for fun.
Africa is not in the grip of an AIDS epidemic and false assertions that the continent is being devastated by HIV are leading to a tragic diversion of resources from genuine medical needs.
Some of the heretics even maintain there is no evidence of a new sexually transmitted disease in Africa.
Where death rates have increased, they say, it is because of civil war, poverty linked to economic decline, and growing use of hard drugs.
Professor Peter Duesberg, the University of California virologist, argues that HIV is harmless and does not cause AIDS.
According to the World Health Organization, 7.5 million people are infected with HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa, and that AIDS will be killing 500,000 people a year there by the end of the century.
Dr. Harvey Bialy, a leading American scientist with long experiences in Africa who accompanied the television crew, says there is absolutely no believable pervasive evidence that Africa is in the midst of a new epidemic of infectious immunodeficiency.
Because international funds are available for AIDS and HIV work, politicians and health workers have an incentive to classify people as AIDS sufferers.
Folks, I hope this sounds like something I spoke to you about in reference to vaccinations, false diagnosis, and renaming of diseases.
Quote, Fear of AIDS is having almost as great an effect as AIDS itself.
People are frightened of going to see a doctor because they believe they will be diagnosed as having AIDS and feel condemned to death.
It has become a joke in Uganda that you are not allowed to die of anything but AIDS.
Bialy said last week, a favorite story is that a friend has just been run over by a car and doctors put it down as AIDS-related suicide.
I heard it from the doorman at our hotel in Kampala.
He was laughing, saying that AIDS was supposed to be sexually transmitted.
Yet in his five years there, the prostitutes who came to the bar were exactly the same.
None of them had become sick.
What is new is that these girls are addicted to viciously adulterated smokable heroin and cocaine.
The scientific editor of Biotechnology, which is a sister publication to the science journal Nature, has been visiting Africa since 1975.
He says, the only utterly new phenomenon I have seen is the drug-using prostitutes in Abidjan and the Ivory Coast.
He said, these girls come from Ghana, from families of prostitutes who were brought in by the busloads.
They've been doing this for generations and never became sick until now.
And again, what I just stopped reading is, What is new is that these girls are addicted to viciously adulterated, smokable heroin and cocaine.
It completely destroys them.
They look exactly like the inner-city crack-addicted prostitutes of the United States.
Bialy says part of the problem is that HIV testing is frequently misleading in Africa.
Well, let me add, it's totally misleading in the United States.
He continues, the tests react to antibodies to malaria as well as HIV, producing up to 80% to 90% false positives.
This is a vast, there's vast literature showing this.
Just so you know that I'm not making this up, folks.
Most AIDS diagnoses in Africa do not involve an HIV test, but are based on World Health Organization definitions based on clinical signs including weight loss, chronic diarrhea, and prolonged fever.
I just read those to you a few minutes ago from Dr. Bill Holland.
A recent study in The Lancet from Japanese doctors working in Ghana reported that out of a group of 227 diagnosed AIDS patients, We're talking about a doctor here, Professor Beverly Griffin, Director of Virology at the Royal Postgraduate Medical School in Hammersmith Hospital.
For the past seven years she has received blood samples of hundreds of children in Malawi.
their blood.
For the past seven years, and we're talking about a doctor here, Professor Beverly Griffin,
Director of Virology at the Royal Postgraduate Medical School in Hammersmith Hospital.
For the past seven years she has received blood samples of hundreds of children in Malawi.
The proportion that are HIV positive has remained unchanged.
This is not from the New York Times.
It's from the March 21, 1993 issue of the London Sunday Times.
It claims elsewhere that Malawi is in the grip of an HIV epidemic, with about a fifth of its population infected.
And again, folks, that...
And let me correct what I said at the beginning of reading.
This is not from the New York Times.
It's from the March 21, 1993 issue of the London Sunday Times.
I hope this has made some impact on you, and I hope you've heard what I've said here, folks.
We're in the midst of a big scam.
I want to get right into this because time is of the essence.
I am now going to read you excerpts from the article that appeared in this month.
Actually, no, it's still this month because it's September now that I'm doing this.
September issue of Spin Magazine.
And we are talking about an interview with Dr. Peter Duesberg with Bob Guccione, Jr.
in Spin Magazine.
I hope You can still go out and get it, and if you can't go out and get it, get the October one, because the October issue is just as good.
It's got another article that I will be reading from as well.
Duesberg's credentials are impeccable.
He is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a recipient of an outstanding investigative grant from the National Institutes of Health in 1985.
He was a candidate for the Nobel Prize for his work in discovering oncogenes, thought to be a cause of cancer.
But he derailed his chance of winning when he cautioned that his findings did not prove that there were cancer genes in cells, as was popularly theorized at the time.
And it is still an unproven theory.
An insane move for a scientist's career, but an exemplary act of ethics.
Now, Dr. Duesberg, I have been studying his work personally for the last five or six years.
It is impeccable.
This man has integrity.
He is brave.
He is not out there trying to find research money, and here's what he has to say about AIDS in an interview with Bob Guccione Jr.
in September's Spin Magazine, starting on page 96.
Spin.
Why do you think HIV doesn't cause AIDS?
Duisburg.
Every virus I've seen gets its job done by killing a cell at a time, and when it is killed enough, you get sick.
HIV is said to be responsible for the loss of T-cells, which are the immune system.
Now, in every AIDS patient studied so far, there is never more than, on average, 1 in 1,000 cells infected by HIV.
How many cells in 1,000 would another virus infect, for instance, a flu virus?
If it would cause flu, then 30% of your lung cells are ruined by the virus, the lining is gone, or infected.
If you have hepatitis, almost every single cell in your liver is infected.
A lot of very bright scientists are working in AIDS, and they don't have all the dubious agendas, and they must have asked themselves the same questions.
If HIV doesn't kill a lot of cells, why is it widely believed to be the cause of AIDS?
Duisburg.
By assigning it all these unprecedented, paradoxical properties that no other virus ever had.
They say it can kill cells indirectly, or can induce something called autoimmunity, which essentially is, the virus sends out a trigger and the body is now convinced to commit suicide.
Or they say there are co-factors, if you really press them hard on it.
But what they are has yet to be determined.
How feasible is the argument that HIV triggers autoimmunity?
It is very implausible, indeed.
There are a million Americans with HIV who are totally healthy.
There are 6 million Africans, according to the World Health Organization, who have HIV.
129,000 had AIDS by the end of last year.
That means 5,800,000 and so many thousands had no AIDS.
Half a million Europeans have HIV and 60,000 have AIDS.
So, there are millions and millions of people on this planet who have HIV but no AIDS.
Why don't 7.5 million get autoimmune disease if HIV is the cause of an autoimmune disease?
Spin.
Well, the establishment says that everybody with HIV will develop AIDS in just a matter of time.
In the last 10 years, Mrs. Duisburg, this has happened in America to about 20% of all people with HIV.
250,000, including deaths to date, out of a million.
But the people who are dying from AIDS are hardly ever your all-American friends of 20 to 40 years of age.
Virtually all heterosexual Americans and Europeans who had AIDS are intravenous drug users and folk.
That's a fact that I have verified myself.
Think about that.
And the homosexuals who get AIDS had hundreds, if not thousands, of sexual contacts.
That is not achieved with your conventional testosterone.
It is achieved with chemicals.
Those are the risk groups.
They inhale poppers.
They use amphetamines.
They take quaaludes.
They take amyl nitrate.
They take cocaine as aphrodisiacs.
Spin.
What is it about intravenous drug use as opposed to ordinary drug use, like snorting cocaine, that would mean these people would go on to develop AIDS?
Duesberg.
It's a matter of degree.
With drugs, the dose is the poison.
You take one aspirin, you lose your headache.
You take two hundred, you drop dead.
You smoke one pack of cigarettes, you're fine, but if you smoke two packs of cigarettes for ten or twenty years per day, you may get emphysema.
It's the same with drugs.
If you snort a line of cocaine on a weekend, you probably won't notice the difference.
But if you inject it intravenously two or three times a day, that's when the toxicity shows up.
Back to this argument about HIV.
Viruses can only work one way.
They can only be toxic if they affect a cell.
They cannot work at a distance.
There is no exception.
Viruses are what you call an intracellular parasite.
They don't have an autonomous life.
They are just a little piece of information that is stuck into a cell and acts like a parasite.
But outside of the cell, it's like a disk outside of a computer.
Spin.
Is it possible that AIDS could be an autoimmune-created disease, but HIV isn't the trigger?
Duisburg.
Some of the AIDS diseases could possibly be autoimmune diseases.
Certainly not all.
38% of American AIDS cases have nothing to do with immune deficiency.
38% 10% a Kaposi sarcoma 19% of the so-called wasting disease and then spin
38%.
goes that is seen in Africa a lot the slim disease Duisburg, yes.
There it's somewhat different.
It usually is coupled with infections, but the American or European Wasting Disease is actually specifically defined as a non-parasitic disease.
We're going to turn the tape over here, folks.
Let Bill put his message on, and we'll be back in just a couple of minutes.
Let's go.
♪♪♪ ♪♪♪
Thanks, Alex.
We'll continue to listen in just a moment.
We're not able to verify Alex's research here at the research center here at the hour of the time,
but I urge you to listen again to his tapes and research it yourself, because he really has something to say.
I can remember the years when I was visiting my friends in Haiti from 83 to 85 just before the political coup And the beginning talk about AIDS was blaming people from Africa, America, Haiti, everywhere.
You just couldn't really put your finger on it.
And again, we wonder why it wasn't a public health measure to quarantine a few people in the beginning before it picked up.
Swiss American wants to hear from all of you.
Call 1-800-BUY C O I N. Talk to Gene Miller.
Ask him for information about how you can protect all the things that you've bought during the past many years that you've been working.
Listen to the new program that comes on at 6 o'clock at night, every night now, 6 o'clock Central Time, called T R E N Z by the President of Swiss America Trading.
The President and the owner of Swiss America Trading, Craig Smith, You can call me also anytime, 1-602-333-5174 for information about Gannett stock, Ready Reserve Foods, CAGI information, membership tapes, videos, etc.
Call us!
I want to extend my thanks to all the people who have called in and given information and thank Pat for making a copy of the tape that we made together last night.
We're going to return to Alex and hear the end of his presentation.
If you have your pencil right there, remember you can write down Alex Loglia.
217 East 85th Street, Suite 246, New York, New York, 10028.
We'll hope Alex will return to us.
Continuing with Dr. Duesberg.
But the American or European wasting disease is actually specifically defined as a non-parasitic disease.
Anyway, 6% is dementia, 3% is lymphoma cancer.
If you add those up, that's 38% of all American AIDS cases.
Out of 250,000, that's about 100,000.
Their diseases cannot be explained by any form of immunodeficiency whatsoever.
Why is it considered AIDS then, asks Ben.
That's one of the questions I would love to know the answer to.
I have asked several experts.
They always get mad.
Age is always presented as if it's the immune deficiency.
It is not at all.
Cancer has nothing to do with immune deficiency.
Spin.
So what is the common denominator between all of the 25 AIDS diseases?
Duisburg.
None.
They name it AIDS.
That's all.
None of these 38% have anything whatsoever to do with immunodeficiency, but they're called AIDS.
That's not one AIDS disease.
There's not one AIDS disease that's new.
What is new is only the incidence of these diseases in 20 to 45 year old men, mostly, and a few women.
Which has gone up.
Spin.
I've always thought the 25 diseases that formed the AIDS syndrome had the common denominator that they were the result of immune system's inability to stave them off.
Doosburg.
Now listen to this carefully, folks.
That's how they try to sell it without looking at the evidence.
But cancer is not a consequence of immune deficiency, and we're talking about Kaposi's sarcoma.
Dementia has nothing to do with the immune system.
Your brain is independent of the immune system.
Of course, if there's no immune system and your brain gets infected, you can get meningitis.
But it doesn't affect your IQ.
Sure, in the end, if everything fails, you can get all sorts of diseases.
Even if you accommodate the virus with all sorts of absurd and paradoxical hypotheses, indirect mechanisms, cofactors, autoimmunity, a 10-year latency period, even that doesn't get you around the solid number of 4,621 HIV-free AIDS cases worldwide, with a third of these in the United States.
How do you explain those?
You couldn't have a better alibi than for it not to be there.
You couldn't have a better alibi.
And that is suppressed.
Here we have a real cover-up.
Last year, the numbers of these cases was going up like crazy.
Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institute of Health, and the CDC called a meeting.
And you know what they did?
They gave it a new name.
They call it Idiopathic CD4 Lymphocytophena, or ICL.
When you're HIV-free now, folks, it's no longer called AIDS.
They're gonna diagnose you as having ICL.
Spin.
There are 4,000 cases that don't have HIV, but the 250,000-plus cases that remain do have HIV.
Gooseburg.
That's what you think.
How do you know that?
Spin.
Because they've been tested.
Doosburg.
By whom?
Spin.
By their physicians.
Doosburg.
So who tells us that they have been tested?
Spin.
A guy goes to his doctor, clearly very ill.
He has AIDS.
He's tested or was tested earlier and is found to be HIV positive.
Doosburg.
Even now, there is no record anywhere that says in how many American AIDS cases HIV was actually found.
And you know what, folks?
Dr. Duesberg is right, because I have found out exactly the same thing.
Spin.
But in every AIDS case, the CDC would know whether or not the patient were HIV positive because their physicians reported it.
Listen carefully what Dr. Duesberg responds with.
I've verified this personally.
You're led to believe this by the CDC, but the evidence that HIV is there, they never disclose.
Nowhere in the HIV slash AIDS surveillance report, as they call the national statistics kept by the CDC, do you ever find HIV data.
No survey on HIV at all.
All they talk about is AIDS, and then you read a little more of the fine print as to how AIDS is defined.
They accept what you call presumptive diagnosis.
AIDS cases without HIV tests.
You know what that means?
That means this guy wears a leather jacket, has an earring in his coffin, and he's from San Francisco.
That's an AIDS case.
I don't even have to check it, his physician thinks.
I recently wrote a letter to Harold Jaffe, the acting director of division of HIV slash AIDS at the CDC.
He acknowledged 43,606 presumptive diagnoses up to 1988.
Dr. Duesberg says he's checked the literature and he says he came up with 62,000 unchanged cases until 1992.
Spin.
Let me get this straight.
You're saying between 43,000 and 62,000 of the cases of AIDS up until 1992 were not tested?
Which means we have no idea whether or not they were HIV positive?
Dr. Duesberg responds, absolutely.
Spin.
They may or may not have been HIV positive.
Duesberg, yes.
Even in the latest age definition, in January 1993, they allowed presumptive diagnosis.
In other words, a good number of them, even now, will be reported without an HIV test.
And folks, don't let that throw you, because as I showed on the last show, HIV testing is nonsense.
Continuing.
Spin.
The public perception is that all cases of AIDS have HIV, that a case is not defined as AIDS without the presence of HIV, which would mean, by definition, that somebody tested them.
Duisburg, most people assume, like you, that everyone with AIDS is positive, and that's not the end yet.
We have what is called false positive antibody tests.
They call them HIV tests.
But you know what they're testing?
The antibody can be there and the virus could be long gone.
I told you I wasn't making it up, folks.
Spin.
Additionally, there are cross-reactions, where the antibody might react, say, to malaria or arthritis, and that's mistaken for engaging HIV.
Duisburg.
Exactly.
Or people vaccinated for the flu.
Blood donors.
Ten recently.
Seven out of ten were positive for HIV.
Remember what I said, folks.
Remember, there are many other diseases and reactions that will bring you a positive test for an HIV antibody in most of the AIDS tests that are being used now and even that shouldn't make you go out and want to get tested because even if you find you have HIV, there are 5,000 people walking around in the world right now who have been diagnosed with AIDS and don't have a scratch of HIV in them.
Now, Okay.
Spin.
Did they have the virus?
Dewsburg.
No.
Spin.
How do we know they didn't have the virus?
Dewsburg responds.
They were checked a half a year later, and the test was negative.
There was no virus.
Every year, 12 million blood donations are checked.
The donors are treated preferentially.
They don't want them to get the flu, so they give them a flu vaccine free.
7 out of 10 of those guys then tested after the flu vaccine turned out to be quote-unquote positive for HIV.
They didn't have HIV.
The flu vaccine cross-reacted with the HIV antibody.
How often is a test false, asks Ben.
Duisburg responds, the tests can be wrong over 50% of the time.
If you just repeat it, half of them fall out immediately.
But if you look at a group of newly recruited soldiers, 1 in 100 test positive, and when you check them again, 1 in 1,000 remains positive.
Spin, that's pretty incredible.
That means only 1 out of every 10 that tested positive is actually positive.
Duisburg, you see?
That's the point.
The idea that everybody who has age is known to have HIV is far from the truth.
There is a significant percentage who are totally untested, and the tests are often unconfirmed.
And even if they are confirmed, they are only antibody tests.
There are a number of people who even have a positive Western blot, the most reliable antibody test.
But when you look for the virus, it is still not there.
Folks, I hope you're paying attention.
I hope you are paying attention.
I hope you will not get conned into even bothering to go out and get an AIDS test.
Moving on with the interview with Dr. Duesberg.
In San Francisco, there are three people, false positives, who found out now that they have no HIV, but were treated with AZT, which is designed to inhibit the virus.
And AZT, as we all know, It's extremely toxic.
And they have AIDS now.
They have pneumonia.
They have pneumocystis.
Exactly like AIDS.
And they have no virus.
Spin.
You presume it was because of AZT?
Dewsburg.
That's what they're suing for.
Spin.
Explain why you have called AZT AIDS by prescription.
Dewsburg.
It's AIDS by design.
It was designed over 20 years ago as a chemotherapy.
And chemotherapy is a rational but desperate treatment for cancer.
The rationale is, let's kill all the growing cells for several weeks.
The hope is, the cancer is going to be totally dead and you are only half dead and recover.
Chemotherapy is a rough treatment.
You lose your hair, you lose weight, you get pneumonia, you get immune deficiency, you literally get AIDS.
You have nausea.
You have all the AIDS symptoms because it's severe cellular intoxication.
You kill a lot of good cells too.
Often the treatment works, the cancer is indeed dead, and you survive and recover.
Now you give that drug to somebody indefinitely.
Not just for two or three weeks.
Every six hours.
Your HIV positive person takes 250 milligrams of AZT.
So they lose weight, they become anemic, they lose their white cells, they have nausea, they lose their muscles.
Like Rudolph Nureyev.
They cannot even stand on their own legs, and they die.
Like Kimberly Bergalis, Nureyev, Arthur Ashe, Ryan White, and many others.
That's what you call AIDS by prescription.
There's one issue even more fundamental we scientists have never discussed.
Is AIDS actually an infectious disease or not?
You see, you can acquire a disease in two ways.
Either by a microbe, and then it's an infectious disease, and then you can pass it on sexually or otherwise.
Or you acquire it from the environment.
That is by toxins, like you acquire lung cancer from smoking or liver cirrhosis from drinking.
These are two entirely different mechanisms of getting a disease.
So how do we tell them apart?
The infectious diseases have one thing in common.
Without one single exception, all infectious diseases are equally distributed between both sexes.
Zero exceptions.
Spin.
Isn't the argument, though, that the immune system is losing the battle?
The antibodies may be there, but the T-cells are being depleted, so the immune system is actually losing the battle.
Dewsburg.
Only if the virus has ever overwhelmed the immune system.
But it hasn't.
The immune system does beautifully.
It knocks the virus out to a level where nobody can find it.
Dr. Gallo and Dr. Montagnier had a hell of a time finding it because it was gone.
That's why we look for the antibodies in the AIDS test.
It can't find the virus.
That's the third point.
Again, no exceptions to that rule.
Where you have an infectious disease, the microbe that is responsible for the disease is abundant and very active in many cells.
Okay, spin.
The argument about AIDS is that there are lots of people who do drugs and don't have AIDS.
It's the dose.
It's the genetic constituency.
Some people are more resistant than others, but very roughly, it's a cumulative thing.
It's a certain threshold you have to reach, and that varies personally.
Now look at AIDS.
It fits none of the criteria of any infectious disease.
Not equally distributed, not soon manifested, no active microbe, nothing is there.
You can't even find HIV if people are dying from AIDS.
You can a tiny bit, but very, very occasionally.
Spin, what about the 10% of AIDS patients that are women?
Duisburg.
Those are drug abusers, mostly.
Okay, the statistics say something like 75% of the women who have some kind of recreational
drug history or were HIV positive and went on ACT.
That still leaves about 25% that don't have a drug history.
Well, continues Duisburg, see if you take 25% out of 10%, you're taking 2.5%.
And now here we come to the definition of AIDS.
AIDS is 25 old diseases under a new name in the presence of HIV.
These diseases do occur with or without HIV.
Spin.
Is there a difference in the manifestation of, for instance, tuberculosis in a case where a woman has tuberculosis and HIV, and a case where a woman just has tuberculosis?
Soothberg.
None that I know of.
Absolutely the same.
And they should, if they're both of average health, either recover or die at the same pace.
Duisburg.
It should be exactly the same.
The only thing is that because HIV is rare in this country, only 1 in 250 Americans, or 0.4%, are HIV positive.
And because it's so difficult to pick up, the odds are that he or she may be one of those people who have practiced risk behavior or been receiving transfusions.
Now, let's read a little bit more here, and this I hope you'll pay very, very close attention to.
What you're saying is, Woman A and Woman B are identically sick, so we can challenge the readership of the magazine that if anyone out there has AIDS, and is HIV positive but hasn't done any risk behavior they should contact us and let us look at their case history.
And we would learn a lot if such a person who doesn't come from one of the risk groups has HIV and has developed AIDS.
Have you scrutinized the case histories of any patient who has AIDS, is HIV positive and doesn't come from a risk group?
Duisburg.
They are extremely rare.
Those are the cases like Kimberly Bergalis.
They give them AZT, and then it is finished.
Spin.
Did Kimberly Bergalis, the Florida woman who allegedly contracted HIV from her dentist, get AZT before or after she had AIDS?
Doosburg.
She had a yeast infection.
That was her diagnostic disease, which is not so rare in women.
And she had antibodies for the virus.
Doos- uh, spin.
After her HIV diagnosis, they gave her AZT.
Tell me a woman with a yeast infection needs blood transfusions for anemia.
My personal opinion is that your yeast infection along with some other factors will give you
a false positive HIV test.
But let's read on what Dr. Duesburg says.
Tell me a woman with a yeast infection needs blood transfusions for anemia.
Tell me a woman with a yeast infection who loses 30 pounds in a year.
Tell me a woman with a yeast infection who loses her hair and needs a wheelchair because
of muscle atrophy.
How many women fit that description?
I've heard of not one.
Spin.
And all she had at the time of prescription of AZT was a yeast infection?
Are you sure of that?
Dewsburg.
They said the yeast infection was first, and then she later also had some kind of pneumonia, and they don't say when they started her on AZT.
But I have yet to ever hear of a 21-year-old that needs blood transfusions for pneumonia or a yeast infection.
SPIN.
AZT destroys the bone marrow, doesn't it?
Of course it does.
It kills the red cells.
Anemia is the first direct effect of AZT toxicity.
If you have no red blood cells, you can't pick up oxygen.
You're in trouble, my friend.
Folks, I'm going to stop here with the SPIN article from the September issue, and I'm going to continue now with a This is an excerpt from the article on AZT in Spin Magazine for October 1993.
It's out on the stands right now.
Go and get it.
You'll definitely like it.
It discusses a recent study that has just been done that has proven, finally, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that AZT is a killer drug and that the original study which was done to determine its efficacy was done by the same company that produces the drug, which is Burroughs Welcome.
Let me read you this.
I think you'll find it rather entertaining.
A recent Burroughs Welcome-sponsored community forum held in New York City was intended to put the Concord results into context, a euphemism for damage control.
But it erupted into chaos when the audience started raising questions.
Burroughs Welcome had pieced together a panel of doctors, And activists to discuss, update, and reevaluate the data from the Berlin conference.
Nothing is black and white anymore, said activist Mike Barr in his opening speech.
Shades of grey are everywhere.
But the audience was in no mood for shades of grey.
At the question and answer session, one speaker said, Hi, my name is Tom, and this is my question.
Since the basis for this therapy is to destroy HIV, could you tell me what the specific keynote study is that proves HIV causes AIDS?
I mean, only because it's pretty important since billions of dollars are being put into these drugs.
At this point, part of the audience clapped and the other half glared angrily or sighed disgustedly.
Others spoke up, their voices weak at first, then stronger.
Answer the question.
How do you know HIV causes AIDS?
The panel moderator hemmed and hawed.
I'll try to answer that, he said.
It's a very complex question.
The audience was impatient.
Just tell us to study.
Moderator, it's a complex question and there are lots of emotions on both sides.
I try to read the literature on both sides and this is my conclusion.
There are many factors associated with the progressive decay of the immune system.
It depends on what kind of vocabulary you want to use.
When you say something is a primary factor and when you say something is a co-factor.
Audience, could we get the name of the study please?
Moderator, the study?
Okay.
I'm in clinical practice, so I'll have to enlist the help of the academicians up here to see if I can give you the name of the study.
Audience.
But everything is based on HIV.
One man asked, how can you give a drug that causes AIDS?
The physician's desk reference says that AZT will cause all the symptoms that are listed as AIDS symptoms.
From the panel, Dr. Catherine Anastos, Director of HIV Primary Care Service at Bronx-Lebanon Hospital, snapped back.
There are a few bottom lines that we have to acknowledge.
One is AZT does not cause AIDS.
AZT can have side effects in a certain number of people that cause symptoms that are similar to those caused by the disease itself.
And when you're a physician or a patient, part of the challenge is to figure out whether it's the disease or the treatment that is causing the symptoms.
And if it's the treatment, then it's not worth giving.
But AZT is no different from any other drug that we prescribe for any other illness in that ratio.
AZT is relatively non-toxic, especially in early disease, compared to most other drugs.
Compared to what?
Cyanide, we heard from the audience?
Her voice was drowned in the din.
Barr said he wondered why all these crazy people vilifying AZT were not smart enough, quote-unquote, to see that the other two anti-retrovirals, DDL and DGC, were far more toxic than AZT.
Another man got up.
I've been HIV positive for almost four years.
Now I find out from reading biotechnology that three to thirteen percent of Amazonian tribes in the jungle tested positive and they have no AIDS.
That the test reacts with all kinds of proteins that are not specific to HIV.
This whole thing is a scam and I hope to see you all at the Nuremberg trials, lady.
Other members of the audience screamed at him for being rude.
At this point it seemed as if everybody was hollering at the top of his or her lungs.
What's the name of the goddamn study that proves HIV causes AIDS?
This is my life and I've waited 10 years for the answer.
Someone on the panel, uh... Nobody up here actually said HIV causes AIDS.
I don't think... The moderator declared a 15-minute intermission at this point.
Upon resumption, the audience had to write its questions on cards.
The moderator read the last one.
I have been HIV-positive and healthy, taking no treatment for 6 years.
Every last one of my friends who has taken AZT or other antiretroviral therapy is dead.
How do you explain that?
The question was dismissed.
Folks, if you get anything from what I've been telling you over the last couple of shows, understand it's the germ zone-caused disease, and that AIDS is a scam, and that you don't need AIDS testing, because AIDS is not what people are dying from these days.
I have tons more information, if you want some of it, Write to me.
I want to get it out to as many people as possible.
Alex Loglia, L-O-G-L-I-A, 217 East 85th Street, Suite 246, New York, New York, 10028.
Good night, folks.
Believe nothing.
Verify everything.
and I hope you will do something with what you've learned.
Thanks, Alex.
That's the one old lady.
We're glad you were with us for these four sessions and we hope you hear from many, many people.
It's a serious subject.
I hope everyone will research what Alex has brought to us and find out whether it's true or false.
A caller called in and shared something that I've been looking for, the fact that The Concord Coalition, which was formed after Warren Rudman decided he wouldn't run for the Senate again.
It was formed by Warren Rudman and Paul Songhus.
Warren, I believe, I was in high school with.
And on the board is Paul Volter, a past head of the Federal Reserve.
And I believe Warren Rudman and Paul Volter are either members now or have been members of CFR and Trilateral.
We have to research all these things.
Find out why drugs even came into America.
We're off satellite.
You'll have to research why that happened too.
But don't worry, William Cooper will be right back with us.
We're on WWCR by telephone as we were tonight.
And we won't go away.
Before you go to bed tonight, I hope you'll call 1-800-BUY-COIN.
Talk to Gene Miller.
Find out what information he has to send to you.
Listen to the new program that Swiss American Trading, where Gene Miller works and gets his information.
The program is TRENZ, T-R-E-N-Z, and is on at 6 p.m.
Central Time, 5.810.
Learn about your money and the history of money.
It's important.
It's as important as the subject we've been listening to tonight.
Well, you haven't heard Sugar Bear, and you may have heard the wood fire crackling as I did.
I had to check it out to make sure everything was alright, but it always fools me when a few pops and crackles start coming through.
▲
Export Selection