David Krauss

La conclusion de la review où il est indiqué que l’hypothèse viral HIV n’est qu’une hypothèse qui n’est pas validée par les faits (? ???) :

Education Needs Widening

Pease concludes that the most pressing need now in the AIDS epidemic is education. This should not be confined to the promotion of condom use, though unprotected, promiscuous sex could clearly pose a risk. For the undeveloped world, it especially needs to focus on the bad medical practices that account for many deaths. And in the developed world, it needs to be understood and recognised that the evidence does not support the HIV concept, even though this has beenmarketed as established truth so effectively that there is now a world-wide demand for ‘‘anti-retroviral’’ drugs and for a prophylactic vaccine against a virus whose existence, in the form currently perceived, is not supported by the evidence.

Tall et Svenn que pensez vous de cette chercheuse qui a 30 de boulot derrière elle :

This book offers a new way forward in our understanding of AIDS and the mechanisms underlying it, which may be enormously important to future directions for research and treatment. Written by a medical microbiologist with more than 30 years of experience with ‘‘hands on’’ work, especially that involving electron microscopy, it makes extensive use of laboratory-acquired expertise and evidence to question the view that a retrovirus is responsible for the collapse of the immune system seen in AIDS. It describes a possible alternative mechanism in the initiation of AIDS, associated with infective agents but not in a conventional way, and proposes that the same mechanism may also be involved in some forms of cancer and arthritis.

Et oh mon dieu cette chercheuse a travaillé avec des experts dans d’autres domaines...

- immunologists
- rheumatologists
- virologists

et arrive à une conclusion tout à fait contraire au consensus actuel sur le SIDA !

Et elle travaille : faculty of medicine at Birmingham University, in the UK.

Et si ces travaux ont un quelconque intérêt et se révèle exact à 100% cela sera juste un chagement complet dans la gestion de cette maladie.

Juste la preuve que pendant 20 ans la recherche était sur une mauvaise piste ?

Bonnes questions, non ?...

Petit extrait de la review, si cela s’avère vraie alors cette piste a été abandonnée à tort il y a des années et ce provoquant une perte de temps énorme et beaucoup de morts, voilà pourquoi je m’intéresse au sujet également :

Pease accepts that antibodies currently held to indicate the presence of HIV, as used in the HIV test, can be a genuine signal of immune dysfunction. She presents evidence, however, that these antibodies are in fact autoantibodies, directed against some of the body’s own cell constituents, rather than representative of an immune response to an infectious agent. This would indicate that AIDS is essentially an autoimmune disease, a view that found currency in the early years of the epidemic but which fell from favour after HIV was accepted in 1984 as the cause of AIDS. Pease’s research was carried out mostly in the faculty of medicine at Birmingham University, in the UK, where she worked with immunologists and rheumatologists as well as virologists in developing expertise on the life cycles of bacteria, their ability to contaminate tissue cultures, and their possible role in various major forms of disease.

C’est le cas car je vois de plus en plus de scientifique émettre des doutes... Ce qui attise la curiosité chez moi.

Un exemple récent :

Une scientifique se permet de parler de maladie autoimmune à propos de Sida :

Mme Phyllis Pease, D.Sc., Ph.D. vient de publier un livre, AIDS, Cancer & Arthritis, où, sans aucune référence à Peter Duesberg et autres dissidents notoires, elle met en doute le « dogme ».

Neville Hodgkinson, journaliste en a publié une « revue » dans le « Journal of Scientific Exploration », revue disponible sur le site de l’Alberta Reappraising Aids Society :

http://aras.ab.ca/articles/popular/200710-PeaseReview-Hodgkinson.pdf

Pourtant c’est le cas