AIDS is curable
Dear reader!
The AIDS problem presented in this material is approached from a completely new perspective, entirely unknown to current medicine. All presented material is the result of private research and cannot be accessed by any expert from any other source. Therefore, a specialist can express his opinion exclusively after acquaintance with the given material and strictly based on the given information. Any opinion rejecting this material, referring to any other source, is a display of malevolent intentions fueled only by pride, envy and arrogance, the result of which is the continuing massive death of the ill.
The Pathocomplex Process
When Thomas Newcomen, an English smith, created the first steam engine in 1712, he never guessed that this event would bring our mankind to such a dimensional deadlock at the end of the 20th century. His discovery marked the beginning of a new era – an era of technological and industrial development destined to radically change our lifestyle and consequently, the human biology on Earth. In the second half of the 18th century, following the industrial revolution, our mankind makes a sharp turn towards urbanization, estranging from the familiar and natural conditions of previous live. Before that period, our mankind lived on Earth in relatively constant conditions for over 15,000 years, in close communion with nature. Thereafter, as a result of sharp changes in environmental conditions and the gradual appearance of a new social structure over the following centuries, the human body undergoes significant biological, adaptable and evolutionary reorganizations. Human’s biochemistry evolves and our immune system undergoes evolutionary transformations.
From medical sources, especially immunology, it is known that the protective reactions of higher organisms, as opposed to more primitive forms using cellular mechanisms, occur mainly through the humoral mode, although the cellular mode partially contributes as well.
The mechanism of humoral immunity is carried out as follows: when an antigen which can be a component of various viruses, bacteria, parasites, fungi, or simply an allogenic substance enters the body, B-lymphocytes surround it from all directions and bind to it through interaction with their surface antibodies. The agglomerate of B-lymphocytes bound to destroy the antigen forms an immune complex. After a series of consecutive mechanisms, the antigen breaks down and its constituents are removed from the body.
Following antigen destruction, the immune complex is immediately disassembled, and the released B-lymphocytes continue to perform their protective function. While circulating in the bloodstream, B-lymphocytes repeat these actions each time an antigen is encountered. The greater the number of antigens penetrating into the body, the more intensive is the load on the immune system and particularly on the circulating B-lymphocytes. Dissolution of the immune complexes is carried out by substances continuously synthesized and secreted into the bloodstream. If the synthesis of these substances is reduced or terminated, the disassembly process is partially or completely interrupted. The B-lymphocytes that are unable to escape are completely neutralized and cannot perform further protective functions. The physiological process of humoral protection, which depends on the assembly and disassembly of these immune complexes, is impaired. While complex formation takes place as usual, the mandatory final process of their disassembly is prevented due to the absence of necessary factors. Consequently, the physiological immune complexes become pathological. The associated B-lymphocytes are maintained in a neutralized condition trapped within the network of each pathological immune complex, thus paralyzing the functions of the immune system. Depending on the intensity of pathocomplex formation, either a partial immunodeficiency such as in the case of systemic pathologies (rheumatism, systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic scleroderma), or a complete immunodeficiency as in the case of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
 |
| Physiological process of the formation and disbandment of the immune complexes |
 |
| Pathocomplex process |
Origin of Human’s Immunodeficiency
Beginning from the second half of the 18th century, once mankind takes a sharp turn towards urbanization and alienation from nature radical biological, adaptable and evolutionary changes emerge in the human body. Among them, the synthesis of the substances required for the disbandment of immune complexes in the last stage of humoral defenses, begins to decrease. Consequently, a rising fraction of the immune complexes starts to lose their ability to be disassociated and a growing number of B-lymphocytes are trapped in them. A fraction of immune complexes fails to disassociate and becomes pathological. Once trapped in the pathocomplex networks, B-lymphocytes lose the ability to perform their basic protective function. They lose their functionality and become completely neutralized. Over the years, as the proportion of neutralized B-lymphocytes increases, immunodeficiency emerges and progresses. On the other hand, the pathological immune complexes circulating in the bloodstream can associate with other blood cells and proteins to form giant aggregates (in terms of biology), which cause occlusion of the blood vessels and subsequent thrombotic infarction resulting in necrosis of surrounding tissues.
Thus, the accumulation of pathological immune complexes creates two major complications over the past centuries. The first problem is the emergence of diseases caused by sedimentation of pathocomplex networks in tissues and blood vessels, and subsequent tissue damage. The second problem is the emergence of acquired immunodeficiency due to the entrapment of leukocytes in immune pathological complexes, especially B-lymphocytes, the key effectors of body defenses. As they gathered around an antigen to form pathocomplex networks, but could not be released for the lack of synthesis of necessary substances, the immune system became progressively more paralyzed. This is how partial or complete immune deficiency appears in our human history for the first time.
During their emergence, pathological immune complexes introduced new nosological forms, entirely unknown to mankind till that time. In other words, a whole group of human pathologies, grouped under the name of "pathocomplex process", arose as a result of humanity’s sharp turn towards urbanization and the emergence of biological, adaptable and evolutionary changes. The first signs of pathocomplex process were detected as symptoms of systemic diseases resulting from sedimentation of the pathological immune complexes within the tissues and blood vessels. The basic clinical features of the pathocomplex process were first documented in 1835 by Bouillaud, a French doctor who described the modern symptoms of rheumatism. The symptoms clearly highlighted the damaging effects of the pathocomplex process. In essence, sedimentation of pathocomplexes on different tissues, especially in the joints causes chronic inflammation. On the other hand, symptoms of immunodeficiency (i.e. tonsillitis, sepsis, endocarditis) arise from permanent entrapment of lymphocytes in pathocomplex networks and the neutralization of their defensive function.
The emergence of the pathocomplex process creates several new diseases over the centuries, including glomerulonephritis (1836), systemic scleroderma (1847), dermatomyositis (1891), systemic lupus erythematosus (1894 – 1903) and periarteritis nodosa (1926).
Evolutionary patterns, deduced from the analysis of the pathocomplex process, suggest that this category of pathologies is considerably longer, including systemic vasculitis, arachnoiditis, endocarditis, Raynaud's disease, pathocomplex diabetes, autoimmune thyroiditis, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, chorea, Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, multiple myeloma, lymphogranulomatosis (Hodgkin's disease) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
All recent pathologies share a common characteristic feature and integral component, which is an immune deficiency at varying degrees, manifested in the form of infectious processes accompanied by high fever.
In the course of its evolution during the 1930s, the pathocomplex process generates a new group of diseases that contrary to popular pseudoscientific assertions, our humanity has never encountered before: the cardiovascular diseases. They manifest as hypertension, ischemic heart disease, arrhythmia, heart attacks and strokes and are now recognized as the leading cause of global morbidity and mortality.
The growing incidence of pathocomplex process, reaching its peak by the 1980s, results in a complete immune deficiency. Suddenly, a new condition for the human body appears and takes our humanity by surprise much like the onset of cardiovascular pathologies in the 1930s.
More than 200 years have passed since the second half of the 18th century, when the human body first began its evolutionary reorganization till the 1980s. As a result of this long period, our humanity has reached a state of complete immune deficiency. Now, that the human body was virtually deprived of its immunity, it was vulnerable to the invasion of all kinds of pathogenic agents, from the weakest viruses, fungi and parasites to the most virulent bacteria, subsequently leading to virusemia, bacteriemia and sepsis. This marks the beginning of a new era – an era of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome. Essentially, the peak evolution point of the pathocomplex process is primarily responsible for the manifestations of AIDS. At the peak of pathocomplex process development, as human blood exhibits a complete immune deficiency typical of this stage, a wide spectrum of microorganisms including viruses can now be detected by serological tests. At this moment, against the vagueness and fogginess of the mounting crisis, a motivated "scientist" named Robert Gallo suddenly appears at the nick of time and, without any effort, finds traces of a mysterious virus in the blood serum of a person suffering from a complete immune deficiency. Not reflecting on the consequences, Robert Gallo introduces confusion into the whole sequence of events by presenting this mysterious virus as the etiological factor of human immunodeficiency.
The detection of antibodies specific to the virus in these particular circumstances is not necessarily an argument and evidence of the virus’ participation in the development process of complete immune deficiency. The presence of antibodies against any pathogenic agent, in the blood serum of a subject affected by the pathocomplex process at the peak of its evolution, is only an indicator and a consequence of pre-existing immunodeficiency. With his deed, Robert Gallo intentionally committed a forgery that initiated a chain of events that would shake humanity from the late 20th to the early 21th centuries.
What did Robert Gallo do?
Using serological method, Robert Gallo discovered traces of a certain virus, two proteins that reacted to his test system – Р24 and Р41 in the blood samples of people already suffering from immune deficiency caused by the pathocomplex process. This gave him the basis to immediately declare not only that a new virus has emerged, but that this supposedly discovered virus was hundred-percent responsible for the emergence of the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome.
The same kind of primitive thinking assigned a role for cholesterol in cardiovascular diseases, Streptococcus in systemic diseases, Helicobacter pylori in gastritis and stomach ulcer, sugar in diabetes, and many others. The kernel of each error was the absence of analytical thinking.
Primitive conclusions from direct observations and absence of analytical thinking to distinguish the cause and effect became the basis for the promotion of current theories explaining the etiology of these illnesses. After so many silly and useless theories, mankind has now accepted yet another nonsense – the theories on AIDS.
In the case of human immunodeficiency, it doesn’t matter whether Robert Gallo truly found the antigens of a real virus, actually identified them and created the test system by immunization of laboratory animals with these antigens or followed the principle of the blood serum protein hydrolysis. It is only a question of a human conscience, his in particular, if it exists at all. Human immune deficiency existed and still exists. The real dispute is around its origin. Simultaneously with Robert Gallo, the French Luc Montagnier, a friend who closely collaborated with him, claimed he detected viral traces that could be the etiological factors of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). With the aid of prostituting mass media, the whole world immersed into the vacuum of medical science readily accepted and implanted this statement.
It is in this atmosphere within the medical science vacuum that a competition for a Nobel Prize flared up between the French Luc Montagnier and his like-minded friend Robert Gallo – an American of Italian origin with whom he fondly communicated about his achievements. The feud between them reached its peak even before this new disease was identified as a separate nosological unit or the virus causing this disease described, even before the existence of the virus and even without enough statistical data to demonstrate the potential for an epidemic. Motivated solely by the thrill of winning a Nobel Prize, driven by personal ambition, these two "scientists" went so far that proving the etiological role of the isolated virus in human immunodeficiency was no longer important for them. To receive the Nobel Prize by all means necessary became their only purpose.
In May 1984, before the scientific evidence from the conducted "research" on detection of the factors causing the human immunodeficiency was ever received, using the data received from his friend Luc Montagnier, Robert Gallo hastily published his article in the Science magazine, where the so-called virus was presented as the main etiological factor of AIDS. Despite the fact that no virus has been discovered yet, the whole world immersed in the information vacuum accepted this statement on a wide scale as the greatest discovery and sensation of the 20th century.
The biggest deceit of mankind instantly spread throughout the entire world as a scientific discovery. A new theory and a new disease under the name of AIDS emerged and yet another virus, the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) was invented as its etiological factor. Due to the element of surprise and the vacuum in medical world at that time, nobody could express an objective opinion. Statements about the detection of the new disease and the occurrence of a new theory explaining its etiology were based on the analysis of only 72 patients and in only 26 of them the antibodies against some fragments of a mysterious and to this day unidentified virus were discovered. What kind of brain shall one possess to instantly deduce the primitive conclusion that a certain unidentified virus is the etiologic factor of AIDS simply from the discovery of certain antibodies in the blood of patients suffering from complete immunodeficiency?
The competition for the Nobel Prize between the so-called American and French scientists continued. In deep sleep, the naive World, did not even suspect what was cooking for breakfast.
If Robert Gallo was destined to be awarded the Nobel Prize for his dishonesty and dishonorableness under action conditions, it would have been far better if he was offered it before he ever invented "HIV" back for his discovery of the so-called blood cancer virus so that, once satisfied, he would finally attain his well-deserved rest and leave the medical world without his future "creative" plans and ambitions. In any case, some other swindler would be awarded the Nobel Prize by the auction hammer in the future.
Angry and dissatisfied this time, Mr.Gallo quickly registered and patented everything that was yet unproved and most importantly, that was dishonestly accrued from Montagnier under his name. The case reached the court when Luc Montagnier, the French doctor and Mr.Gallo’s friend, accused him of theft and appropriation of the exchanged information and registration of another’s achievements under his name. The US President Ronald Reagan urgently intervened into this flared up international scandal and negotiated with the French prime-minister Jacque Chirac about a mutually advantageous compromise for the settlement of dispute that created the uproar in the medical "scientific" world, quite distant to both politicians. On March 1987, during a ceremony held at the White House, they finally concluded a memorandum providing that all rights to sell the test systems for the ostensibly AIDS virus would belong to the US Ministry of Health and the France Pasteur Institute. The income from the sales of these test systems was to be proportionally divided between these establishments. The test systems for detection of the so-called HIV that according to their forecasts would spread across the globe like a lightning were to be sold under the exclusive patent of the Ministry of Health of America and the France Pasteur Institute.
Considering that the number of "HIV-infected" people is constantly growing and officially reaching about 60 million and that twice more test systems would be necessary to detect them all, the sales of these reagents were predicted to generate astronomical revenue for the aforementioned establishments. Now, they understood that, as long as the theory of viral origin of AIDS remains afloat and funded, this quite promising business is capable of enlarging the budget of any country. To strengthen their positions, this theory needed to be associated with some public taboo, for example homosexuality. Very few people would dare to raise this theme without being labeled homosexual then. This is why the science of social psychology is needed and Pavlov came in handy even here.
This is precisely why these institutions are motivated to detect more people positive for "HIV". As long as nobody will dare to protest to such inhuman trade around this theory because of the artificial social problem and artificial taboo created around AIDS, their "business" will continue to prosper and they will continue to plunder our world with quiet souls.
The standard view on AIDS
The standard theory on viral original of AIDS stipulates that when the protein molecules of the lipid viral core bind to the lymphocyte’s surface antibodies, the external membrane of the lymphocyte dissolves and the virus enters the cell. As the virus dissolves in the cell, the viral RNA leaves the nucleus and starts to multiply. As a result, the virus proliferates and during the process of exiting the lymphocyte, causes its destruction and hence, immune deficiency.
It is widely accepted that viruses do not contain lysosomes to lyse the cell membrane of lymphocytes. Therefore, the viruses can exit only as a result of cell rupture, owing to their intracellular reproduction. The number of viruses that multiply in one human blood lymphocyte can be determined by a simple calculation. The size of a lymphocyte is 8 to 10 microns. The size of the so-called AIDS virus is about 100 nanometers. If we assume that the lymphocyte’s rupture occurs as a result of an overwhelming volume of the multiplied viruses, around 80 viruses are freed from the cell at the moment of rupture. Likewise, we can calculate the total number of viruses that have multiplied in a person’s lymphocytes. One liter of human blood contains on average 6·109 of leukocytes, a third of which are lymphocytes, i.e. 2·109. In 5 liters of blood, there would be about 10·109 lymphocytes. Then, the total number of released viruses would reach 8·1011. If the standard theory of AIDS were true, with such viral concentration, it would be possible to collect viruses from the blood directly with a scoop even disregarding the dynamics of the process. Yet, for Gallo and Montagnier, the great "scientists-virologists" of the 20th century, it was difficult to identify and present the scientific world with even a "couple".
From a scientific point of view, the standard explanation for the mechanism by which a viral infection causes AIDS is unacceptable. The current theory is not capable to prove the influence of the virus.
If the virus really proliferates, its quantity should grow exponentially. Why is it that, two weeks after infection, the virus cannot be detected? After two weeks, nobody can find a virus, except traces of its antibodies. Then, where are the billions of viruses hiding?
Food for thought: the number of red blood cells averages nearly 12·1012 in 5 liters of blood. When we bleed, their accumulation can be observed with the naked eye.
AIDS-dissidents, arguments against AIDS
The so-called scientific inventors of the viral theory of AIDS that have suddenly appeared on the fruitful soil around the newly arisen problem were continuously attacked by a huge stream of criticism from the general population, including AIDS-dissidents. Several articles discussing and criticizing this theory were published in various newspapers and magazines from the very first days. Unfortunately, their discussions were limited to whether the virus or immunodeficiency existed or not. Nobody pondered on the possible involvement of other etiological factors in immunodeficiency, besides the virus. The fact that the existence of the etiological was denied but nothing in exchange was proposed given the indisputable existence of immunodeficiency not only enabled the supporters of the viral theory of AIDS to rebut these critics easily, but also to prove their case, thus strengthening their own positions. In most disputes against the widely accepted AIDS theory, the very fact of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome existence was rejected, along with the role of the virus. This point of view allowed inventors of the AIDS standard theory to simplify all arguments opposing AIDS down to a simple tagline – "AIDS does not exist!" – using it then as a weapon for an easy exclusion of their opponents. The well-designed phrase would then be necessarily accompanied by playing the following grandstand, "Since AIDS is nonexistent, let's stop all measures to combat the disease. Let the people perish in large numbers."
The fundamental principles for establishing a particular microorganism as an etiologic factor of a disease, later known as Koch’s postulates, were formulated by Robert Koch in 1884. Based on these principles, the four following conditions must be demonstrated for a microorganism to be identified as causal factor of a disease:
1. The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms.
2. The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
3. The cultured microorganism should cause the same disease along with its characteristic symptoms when introduced into a healthy organism.
4. The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host, and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.
Not a single one of these conditions has been met with respect to the "AIDS virus", from its declaration in 1984 until today. The sole foundation for establishing this virus as an etiologic agent of human immunodeficiency was the intervention of President Reagan who, at that time, needed huge amount of money to finance the development of his military plans on the stealth airplane application. The events that unfolded over the following years, and particularly the role of the stealth planes in the dissolution of the USSR, and the involvement of the USA in various wars all over the world, demonstrated that the money made from the spread of the AIDS phantom was completely suitable, justified and needed.
Many other arguments reject the theory on viral origin of human immunodeficiency in AIDS, including those presented by the AIDS-dissidents.
Dear reader!
Everything discussed, so far, is a set of theories, arguments, counter-arguments, evidence for and against the viral theory of AIDS from its authors and opponents since the first mention of AIDS. The discussion initiated by us offers an alternative road, a third view on the scientific subject at hand.
Only this kind of free thinking, unrestricted by any rules of thought, allows someone to find the truth which is in its proper place at a certain moment in time. The truth might happen to be on the other side of the fib amongst other options. In any case, the truth has its only definite place. This place might happen not to be on the other side of the fib as well. Chances are that whoever seeks the truth just on the opposite side of the fib, on the basis of the accepted rules of thinking, will not only fail to find the truth, but also exchange it for another fib. In such a case, sooner or later, a third person will come and begin a completely new search from scratch, a search for the third road. These searches either end on the opposite endpoint or lead to the third point. This point can either be true or false, but in both cases it can exist only for a limited period of time as the ever changing time and space can affect both cases in either direction.
This is exactly the case with AIDS. The first group offered the theory of viral role proceeding from a primitive way of thinking, or more exactly, a complete absence of thinking and logic, moreover, motivated by selfish goals. This hasty and dishonest theory was so far from the truth that it spurred the emergence of a new theory that was strictly and symmetrically on the opposite side. Offended by the dishonesty and corruptness of the viral theory of the AIDS supporters, the second group, known as AIDS-dissidents, formed a protest. Yet, in the process of protesting, it landed from one extreme to another. Guided by the idea that "if they are wrong, the truth is on the opposite side", they rejected everything the first group had stated altogether, including the existence of the virus itself and quite often the fact of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome as well.
It was not difficult to refute such a naive, unscientific, groundless, unproven and frequently contradictory theory. They did exactly so by suggesting a theory reversed by 180 degrees. However, to science and those credited for its achievements, the main goal is more than rejecting, it is finding the truth and offering a real solution to the problem at hand. On the other hand, scientists who call themselves the AIDS-dissidents criticized absolutely everything without presenting any alternative theories to offer a way out of this situation.
The proposition of a theory by the second group that had no solid argument against the first group’s theory allowed the latter to strengthen their position. Thus, the search for the truth, and especially for a proof of any third theory, became difficult. The situation resulted in the emergence of the "AIDS does not exist" tagline. In the meantime, immunodeficiency exists in our society and people are dying from it in large numbers. The so-called AIDS virus exists as well and is detected in laboratories in spite of the fact that the second group denies it. Hence, the combined theory of the first group receives a second breath of validity and the right to exist as the second group, while denying the existence of the virus itself and frequently, the existence of immunodeficiency, offered no alternative explanations for the origin of human immunodeficiency and not only found no solution for the AIDS problem, but left the questions around the transmission of the virus and the relationship between the detected antibodies and immune deficiency unanswered.
If thus far we were confronted with the wrongful and dishonest theory of the first group, the emergence of the second group has generated such mistrust in the society with its uncertain fluctuating views that the proof of a third theory has become much more difficult to establish.
So, where is the truth?
For the first time since the standard theory of AIDS has been proposed, an article about the pathocomplex origin of the human immunodeficiency was published in the Ukrainian magazine SPID in 1997. It acknowledged the existence of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, but rejected its viral etiology. It was a single article against the widely accepted universal theory, and naturally caused a colossal reaction and stormy protest at that time. If then, amid the prevailing tendency to accept the viral origin of AIDS, the proposed theory denying the widespread opinion was rare, nowadays the percentage of supporters and opponents of the so-called standard theory of AIDS is gradually leveling. The same year, the pathocomplex process theory was suggested in its final form. It predicted that immunodeficiency is present in different degrees and forms in about 80% of the global adult population. Based on the pathocomplex process theory, human immunodeficiency has reached its peak during the late 20th century as a result of the evolution of the human body that began back in the second half of the 18th century.
Human immunodeficiency existed in its partial form since long ago. Why then is it so impossible to consider that a complete immunodeficiency, which is just a continuation and a development of its partial form, can have the same factor of causation? What if a similar logical classification applied to other diseases? For example, hypertension is a progressive disease made up of several stages. It begins with the first stage and once the symptoms get worse, passes to the next and then on to the third. Is it rational to presume a separate cause for each stage of hypertension?
In present-day medicine, cholesterol is considered the cause of hypertension at all 3 stages. Why wouldn’t such logic and approach apply to immunodeficiency?
Immune deficiency was officially fixated since at least 1835. It never interrupted nor disappeared anywhere till present-day. It merely progressed with every newly discovered disease. Beginning with rheumatism, it has worsened to lupus erythematosus, then to lymphogranulomatosis, and then reached its peak with the appearance of AIDS. Logically, the cause of partial and complete immunodeficiency should be one and the same. Why should there be a separate and special viral cause only for the last stage of immunodeficiency’s development? Then, what was it that was actually discovered in the name of AIDS? Was it an isolated point taken out of the end of a sentence running 175 years in length wherein the heart of the problem was foolishly left unnoticed and ignored owing to the primitiveness, naivety, illogicality of a non-scientific approach as well as dishonesty? Indeed, these were the rudimentary elements of the birth of the AIDS calamity. Primitiveness, naivety, and especially illogical and non-scientific approaches have no place in science and cannot serve as a foundation for scientific discoveries. The bitter experience that was casted upon mankind over the period of AIDS existence illustrates and proves, once and for all, the inadmissibility of similar absurd theories in the human society.
Nowadays, there are many ongoing discussions regarding the very principles behind the detection of the so-called AIDS virus. Signs of mysterious viral fragments, expressed as antibodies, were found in the blood of patients suffering from immune deficiency using immunologic methods developed in the previous centuries. Does the detection of antibodies in the blood of an individual suffering from complete immune deficiency, against a certain virus that has passed through the bloodstream at some point in his life, provide sufficient grounds to make the naive conclusion that it plays a role in the causation of AIDS? This was not a conclusion made by a casual passenger from a passing tram, but by the director of the Institute of Human Virology. Indeed, it turns out that "great" people are capable of bringing about great nonsense.
The detection of antibodies in the patient under any viral diseases has ever been neither proof of the disease presence at the moment nor proof of the involvement of the virus to the disease occurrence. The presence of antibodies after rubella vaccination may not be proof of the disease existence at the time. The synthesis of antibodies is a natural defense of the organism against the intrusion of any antigen, including a virus. Thus, it is ridiculous to make such straightforward conclusion. The detection of antibodies in the human body is an indication of a physiological reaction, rather than pathology. The same process provides the foundation for vaccination.
With respect to AIDS, the virus took advantage of the immunodeficiency to invade the human body. Accordingly, the immune system synthesized antibodies against it. Eventually, this virus was destroyed, but the immune system memorized the first encounter and continues to synthesize antibodies against this virus for life. Nonetheless, the presence of these antibodies in the blood is not an indication for the presence of the virus, or that it continues to exert its pathogenic effect.
The main risk of this disease and the kernel of the general panic is the fact that AIDS patients can die within a short period of time from the onset of the opportunistic infections. If the immune system was completely restored, this danger would disappear forever. However, the tests for antibodies against the so-called virus of AIDS would remain positive for life. This is a separate problem, or perhaps not a problem at all, existing in parallel with the primary disease – the pathocomplex process. The presence of antibodies against any virus in the human body over a lifetime is a natural process, and is not related with the presence of the virus in the organism at the time, let alone to the origin and transmission of immunodeficiency.
A large number of antiviral medicines are available today. Many of these treatments are based on interferon, but their application against "HIV" yields no positive effect on the immunity of AIDS-infected patients. There is no doubt that these antiviral drugs yield a suppressive effect on viruses, but by doing so, they only help to clear the viral share of the combined infection in the body of the patients. The two processes, i.e. the existing immunodeficiency of pathocomplex origin and viral infection, are completely distinct processes. Therefore, the destruction of the virus in the human body does not influence someone’s immunity, thus does not improve the condition of individuals suffering from an immunodeficiency. This proves once again that the process of human immunodeficiency that has effused into a notorious nosological form – the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), is not related to "HIV" whatsoever, and is a completely separate process taking roots in the depth of historical events. Its cause lies in historical truths that are too difficult to grasp for the brains of Gallo and Montagnier – the two "great scientists" of the 20th century.
As such, one can have an Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome and be "HIV" negative, or have no sign of immune deficiency and be "HIV" positive by having antibodies against the so-called virus of AIDS in his body. In other words, amongst other pathogenic agents, the weakest virus in the world, the so-called HIV, may or may not infect a body suffering from an immune deficiency caused solely by the pathocomplex process. This depends on someone’s exposure to the source of the given virus, as with any other viral infection such as flu or rubella. When a virus penetrates the body, specific antibodies are synthesized against it, followed by the activation of immune memory, which will trigger a lifelong synthesis of these antibodies in the bloodstream of this individual; whereas, a virus only circulates in the blood for about two weeks. As with any viral infection, the detection of antibodies against a virus and in this case against the so-called virus of AIDS, does not imply in any way that this virus is currently present in the organism, and moreover, that exactly this virus is the cause of immunodeficiency.
In 1925, a British microbiologist, Fleming, discovered the antibiotics. The emergence of antibiotics marked the end of the domination of worldwide bacterial infections. The efficacy of certain antibiotics for a specific infectious disease is demonstrated by the following principles:
1. The given drug is an antibacterial agent, and the sensitive bacteria are eradicated under its influence.
2. The disease itself is eliminated as a result of the efficacy of this drug, which in turn proves that:
3. These bacteria are indeed the cause, i.e. the etiological factor of this disease.
It is logical to expect similar results when applying the same principles to any other microorganism: antibiotics successfully cope with bacteria, antifungal agents – with fungi, antiviral drugs – with viruses. Then, why is "HIV" is an exception? Long-term application of the strongest antiviral drugs cannot eliminate the problem of AIDS. Aside from serious side-effects, these treatments yield no positive results on the immune status of AIDS patients or "HIV infected" individuals. Besides, antiviral drugs compete successfully with other more complex and resistant viruses, but not with the weakest virus. How can this be explained? Based on the principles stated above for antibiotics and applying them to AIDS, if the virus (HIV) was truly the etiological factor of AIDS, one would expect to establish similar conclusions:
1. The application of antiviral drugs should cure the given disease, i.e. wipe out the problem of AIDS. If that happens, then in turn, it will serve as a proof of the following two facts:
2. Medications applied for this purpose are, indeed, antiviral drugs, and viruses are eradicated under their influence.
3. This particular virus (the HIV) is, indeed, the cause, i.e. the etiologic factor, of AIDS.
It turns out that in the case of AIDS, no logical pattern applies whatsoever. If in spite of all the conventional efforts to combat AIDS on the global scale, the problem of "the plague of the 20th century" remains unresolved, then either the medications used are not antiviral, which is impossible, or the virus is not the cause of this disease. There is no other logical conclusion.
There is no doubt that antiviral drugs affect viruses substantially. This has been extensively proven in laboratories. And yet, at the same time not only do they fail to treat immunodeficiency, but even tend to aggravate the condition further, owing to their side effects, the antigenic protein load on the immune system and amplification of the pathocomplex process. Transient reduction in viral infection as only a part of the combined pathological process immediately recurs as soon as the efficacy of the antiviral drugs is exhausted.
And so, after everything that the AIDS swindle caused around the world, Merck, a pharmaceutical company that failed to deduce the necessary conclusions, spent 10 years to test a new vaccine against AIDS on monkeys and spent millions of dollars for this obvious, useless and thoughtless nonsense. After carrying out an extensive experiment including two subject groups, the company came to the conclusion that their produced vaccine, not only offered no benefit to AIDS patients, but was even dangerous for their health! The health condition of those who received the vaccine dropped to a level significantly lower that of the control group who received no vaccine.
Many knowledgeable virologists explain this defeat by a high variability in structure of the virus. This is another mess designed to prolong the life of the most baseless, and yet the most profitable theory in the history of mankind. The test systems used to detect the proteins and RNA of the so-called Human Immunodeficiency Virus were created back in 1984, and they are still applied successfully for branding patients with the "HIV". These test systems have been reacting, both, with the proteins and the RNA of the virus in a specific and constant manner for more than 25 years. Over such a long period of time, the structure of the protein and the RNA of this "highly variable" virus have not changed in this respect in any way. Then, in what other characteristics should this variability be manifested? Or is it that the question of viral variability does not relate to the profitable aspect of the process? If the virus is variable, then for the purpose of its detection, it would be necessary to create a new test for each new viral structure. It turns out that the virus is not variable when it comes to profit?!
AIDS vaccine
What is a vaccine exactly? A vaccine is an integral structure of a virus, a protein component or RNA. If a protein anticopy has already been created as a test system, using the exact structure of the virus protein or RNA, then why can’t they be used as a vaccine? The answer is obvious: "the virus is variable!"
The invariability of the viral structure is demonstrated by the capacity of the diagnostic tests for HIV to react specifically with the viral proteins, namely Р24 and Р41, and to react specifically to the viral RNA by PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) analysis. What more shall a man need to reach happiness?! All of the viral components are collected. They are the very vaccine. To obtain a diagnostic serum for the test systems, these components must be injected into a laboratory animal, which will produce specific antibodies. In other words, these животным проводится вакцинация, в результате чего в сыворотке их крови появляются защитные антитела, что и является основной и конечной целью любой вакцинации. animals are administered a vaccine which induces the synthesis of protective antibodies delivered into their bloodstream, which is the main and ultimate goal of any vaccination. Vaccination is the deliberate injection of a weakened pathogenic agent, or its components, into an organism so that specific antibodies against this microorganism may accumulate in the blood. For example, if a person is infected with rubella, vaccination occurs naturally, as antibodies against the virus appear in the blood of this person. This goal is also achieved by artificial injection of a weakened virus or its components. In both cases, the patient generates antibodies against the pathogen to fight off the infection, or to weaken the symptoms in the event of a second encounter, thus creating a lifelong protection. In the case of AIDS, when the components of the so-called immunodeficiency virus are injected into a laboratory animal, they induce the production of antibodies which can be extracted from their blood to be later used for the development of the test systems. In other words, these laboratory animals are administered a vaccine. What this means is that viral components are ready available in the form of a vaccine and at the disposal of the current medicine. Other research projects aiming in the same direction, such as those of Merck, merely serve to procrastinate time and distract attention for the purpose of prolonging the commercial process of robbing the whole world. It is hard to believe, and quite impossible, that experts in the field of immunology and virology did not know and did not understand the essence of such a simple and obvious question. At last, the American "scientists" realized that pretending to be a fool is sometimes profitable as well. Hence, the issue of vaccination against the so-called Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) has been solved a long time ago, and the vaccine is practically ready. Then, why not administer these same components as a vaccine to the general population to prevent AIDS? This is where the twisting and pettifogging begins. According to the 20th century’s "great scientists", the natural viral inoculation of humans, and the development of antibodies against the virus, is treated as immunization (active vaccination) for all other viruses, but in the case of AIDS, it is considered as "infection", followed by the status of "HIV-infected"! The virus invaded the organism and antibodies were synthesized against it. They are exactly what the test systems created for these purposes are detecting. Why not consider this process as a vaccination? If viral components are at the disposal of these "great scientists" and they administer them to laboratory animals for the reception of diagnostic serum, why not vaccinate people with these same components to activate the synthesis of antibodies against this virus for a lifetime protection, as it occurs with rubella, for example? The concept is very simple. This is because injection of viral components into humans will stimulate the synthesis of antibodies that, according to the preconceived scenario of these "scientists", should in this case be interpreted as "infection", instead of immunization or vaccination. These antibodies are desperately needed for the diagnostics of AIDS. These antibodies are the daily bread of the AIDS swindlers. The "great scientists" cannot afford to interpret the detection of the antibodies against the components of the so-called HIV as an organism’s protective reaction from vaccination. It is not profitable. Nevertheless, for all other viruses that are not subject to astronomical income, it is absolutely valid to consider the exact opposite. The process of injecting fragments of pathogenic microorganisms for the purpose of antibodies synthesis, including all viruses and particularly the "swine flu", is considered as vaccination. Only the case of the "HIV" is to be interpreted as infection. This is the pure American logic at its best, with a touch of Italian cunning.
To cut a long story short, a vaccine is already at the disposal of the "HIV" authors, but the trees do not allow them to look at the forest! The whole problem is that viral infection is absolutely unrelated to AIDS. The "HIV" authors are perfectly aware that the whole problem is limited around a mystified viral infection that is only there to cover their main goals. They have no way out. Confessing about everything they have done in the world would mean a death sentence.
The declaration of the authors of the standard theory of AIDS on the identification of all "HIV" components is, first of all, a firm statement on the creation of a vaccine. If all components of "HIV" (which strictly speaking, actually constitute a vaccine) are identified, but the vaccine according to their statements does not exist, it merely confirms that they are holding something back or are simply afraid to be disclosed. Experts at such level of biology should know exactly what a vaccine is. The problem is, if they admit that the vaccine exists, they would have to use it to eliminate AIDS, as they promised they would nearly three decades ago. However, they understand perfectly well that a vaccine is not a treatment, but only a prophylactic remedy, and that it is powerless to eradicate AIDS (even if people would believe that "HIV" is its cause). Afraid to be dishonored for results from its application, they prefer to remain silent about it instead. Administering the vaccine would mean that they absolutely insure people from an immunodeficiency as they have promised all this time. In reality, immune deficiency, both, existed and continues to exist, and a vaccination would only give a healthy individual the status of "HIV-infected". It would be difficult to explain then why till now positive reactions were interpreted as "infected" for decades, and that they now mean "immunization". People will ask, "So, after all, are we sick, simply "HIV-infected" or absolutely protected from AIDS (180 degrees contrary)?!!!" The answer, of course, will not be disclosed. Therefore, even given numerous statements about the identification and decoding of the structure of "HIV" (which actually make up the vaccine), they are compelled to lie, saying that vaccines are still not developed (and will not be until someone will not disclose their true identity!!!) Maybe, there is no "HIV" at all and the serological reaction is being deliberately arranged not to reveal any virus and they know about it perfectly well while what the test system is simply detecting fragments of blood proteins, adapted under test systems by hydrolysis method? With their fear to acknowledge the existence of a vaccine, the authors of the standard theory are proving, themselves, that AIDS is not caused by the fabled "HIV".
Thus, all necessary components to completely eradicate AIDS were present a long time ago. Yet, for some mysterious reason, not a single law of immunology or pharmacology applies here. How unearthly is the problem after all?!!
After everything that has been repeated a million times, being as obvious as it is, the supporters of the standard theory of AIDS remain excessively "modest" as they continue to unanimously reply to the question about a way out of the established situation as if nothing happened, saying that, "The vaccine is humanity’s only salvation from the "plague of the 20th century". Only a vaccine is capable of defeating AIDS and rescuing the world!"
For those who look forward to the vaccine, it is also important to add that any vaccine is created and used only to prevent a disease, and not as therapeutic agent for the treatment of disease. Even students of medical universities know that the specific vaccinations are contraindicative for people who have had the disease (actively vaccinated) or who are currently infected. Then, how will the vaccine be able to help out if it cannot be applied to people already infected, and for healthy people if it can only render the status of "HIV-infected"? How would we then distinguish the type A "HIV-infected" who were independently "infected" from type B who were vaccinated?!! In both cases, antibodies will be identical.
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome is curable
Hence, AIDS is not a viral infection. The birth of the popular theory stipulating a viral cause to AIDS is the result of skillful and artful binding of social homosexuality taboo with a human immunodeficiency of unknown origin, at the time – undoubtedly for the purpose of financial gain.
The Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome is the peak point of the pathocomplex process development, which in turn appeared as the result of biological, evolutionary and adaptable changes of the human body that gradually developed over the last two centuries, owing to the sharp changes in environment conditions and social lifestyle. The so-called immunodeficiency virus tends to invade an individual already suffering from an immune deficiency as a result of the pathocomplex process. The detection of antibodies against this virus only serves a diagnostic purpose, as an indicator of the presence of pathocomplex immunodeficiency. Therefore, AIDS treatments should be mainly focused on the elimination of the pathocomplex process. Any medication against the so-called virus of AIDS would only fight off the consequences, and not the cause of the disease. To eradicate the virus, without treating the cause of the disease, would allow recurrent infections by the same virus.
The control of opportunistic infections taking place in the presence of immunodeficiency must be accompanied by a treatment addressing immune deficiency, i.e. to inhibit the pathocomplex process. Otherwise, as soon as the treatment with antiviral drugs and antibiotics is terminated, the immune system will fail to prevent future infections by the virus. These infections will relapse, but this time these viruses will exhibit tolerance for the drugs, complicating the condition of the patient to a deadlock.
AIDS, and many other human diseases currently considered incurable, are completely treatable. AIDS is no longer the problem that should concern our society and medical science. From this point on, all the mistakes that were made regarding AIDS are consequences of the ignorance of the historical path that led human biology to the peak point of the pathocomplex process. The molecular structure of the substances required to complete the last stage of humoral immunity have been discovered by us, and the application of these substances as key components in our integrated treatment of AIDS patients completely cures this disease as immunodeficiency syndrome. The synthesis of these vital substances eventually restores following the course of AIDS treatment. Subsequently, a high-level immunity is independently facilitated by the organism’s potential over the course of entire lifetime. Eliminating the pathocomplex process makes the foundation of numerous human pathologies that are currently considered incurable disappear at one stroke as it once happened in medicine with the application of antibiotics.
Guiding by analytical thinking and laboring over the task for 22 years, we discovered the cause of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, which is the pathocomplex process. Because we understood the mechanism responsible for the development of the pathocomplex process, we were able to identify substances with the vital physical and chemical properties essential for the completion of the last stage of humoral protection. At first injection of these substitute substances, the physiological process of formation and disbandment of the immune complexes unlocks, thereby completely restoring the function of the immune system. During the second stage of treatment, the body begins to synthesize the necessary substances independently, which allow it to fight any pathogenic microorganism, including viruses. The condition of immunodeficiency is completely eliminated. However, it is important to note, once again, that due to the principle of immune memory, the antibodies against the so-called HIV will still continue to be synthesized by the body throughout life as a defense mechanism against future infection. In present-day medicine, the diagnosis of "HIV-infected" is based on detecting antibodies against the "Human Immunodeficiency Virus". Meanwhile, removing these antibodies means leaving the body without a natural defense mechanism.
From a medical standpoint, the problem of AIDS is completely closed. We are ready to defend this statement with any competent scientific review. Inertia of the state system, greed and personal ambitions – these are the main reasons why such statements may seem yet a fantasy.
Sooner or later, our method will find its place in human society and the medical science, like many others. We pity those who were innocently and undeservedly compelled to bear and continue to bear the AIDS stigma, invented by two swindlers, on the tortuous path often leading to voluntary death.
Since 1984, more than 60 million innocent people have perished owing to the well-organized AIDS swindle. Hundreds of thousands, unfairly forced to bear the heavy burden of the "AIDS" stigma, young girls and boys committed suicide because they could not withstand the burden of social injustice and discrimination, suffering from remorse for their loving family and unjustified guilt. Hundreds of thousands of children were abandoned by their mothers, and millions were never born. This is the price of human selfishness mixed with greed.
There is no doubt that Robert Gallo later realized the extent of his deeds, but it was already too late. By that time, the train that he launched had left far away. Others hooked on it and helped it roll faster and Robert Gallo was left far behind. No matter how much he would wish to stop this mountain of moving metal, he would never succeed.
Finally, since skeptics find it convenient to label any new scientific discovery as "traditional" to refute it without going to further troubles, we want to emphasize that the theory of the pathocomplex process and derived from it method of AIDS treatment has no relation to alternative medicine in any of its forms whatsoever and is implemented solely within the scope of modern medicamental medicine, which nonetheless significantly differs from current accepted methods of treatment in medicine whereas all drugs administered are on the pharmacological market for over 40 years and are registered with the health ministries of virtually all countries around the world.
She was born infected,
Her family gave her the flora.
While still a child, she didn’t know,
How bitterly her mother punished her
She didn’t know what will her life be like
How she would cry alone.
She didn’t guess she wouldn’t have
Someone to take her home.
She never had a faithful friend
Friendship was foreign to her.
She didn’t want to go to school
And would rather stay at home.
People scorned her for reasons
No place would give her rest.
Some drove her out when she approached
Others blocked her way.
But no one stopped to think:
This child just wants to live!
Instead they stole her hope,
They cried her way,
"AIDS is a plague!"
They blamed her hard
They wouldn’t cease
"You are a stranger, go away!"
The child is lonely in her grief
She is alone and helpless.
I ask you, people, wake yourself
You need to realize
AIDS is a calamity
AIDS picks its victims randomly…
(Translation from Ukrainian)
