The Politics of Blood and AIDS
Thursday, February 23, 2006 at 11:31AM The “tainted blood” issue is in the news again in an attempt to sort out who lied to whom, and to place blame for a scandal that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people. The injustice of this should make any normal person very angry. “Tainted” means blood with the HIV virus (or with whatever agent[s] in blood are thought to cause AIDS). I knew a father of four who went for shoulder surgery, got tainted blood in a transfusion, and later died of AIDS. Excuse the expression, but this whole business was and remains a bloody outrage. The Red Cross was implicated and faulted publicly – just a wrist slapping - for supplying tainted blood beginning in the 1980s. But the real culprit is a society that was, and remains willing to hide the stark and continuing reality that it is by far male homosexuals who get AIDS in the Western world, and that there were, and are still, radical homosexuals who insisted then, and continue to insist now that AIDS is a mainstream disease and so they should not be excluded from giving blood. I say “radical” because at the start of all this there were a few angry homosexual men on record engaging in “blood terrorism”. Which is to say they felt discriminated against as homosexuals, and saw it as their right to get even with a patriarchal and “homophobic” society by donating their own tainted blood. The more or less true picture on the connection between AIDS and male homosexuality can be obtained from Health Canada, HIV/AIDS Surveillance. They have a website www.aidssida.cpha.ca You can also call them at 613-725-3769 and ask to be sent the “HIV and AIDS” info as a hard copy.
There, you will see a kind of bureaucratic collusion to hide the truth by avoiding honest language. When it started reporting on AIDS in 1980, Health Canada used categories like “homosexual” and “heterosexual” to sort out the incidence of HIV-AIDS, because prior to its political renaming, AIDS was labeled “gay bowel syndrome” by every specialist in the place. But around 1992 or thereabouts the language was changed to such as the cute abbreviation “MSM”. This means “men who have sex with men,” and the clear intent of that language change is to make homosexual behaviour seem innocent and just like a sex act between a man and a woman. These reports go on to quietly inform you that somewhere around 85% of all HIV-AIDS deaths in Canada from the 1980s until now have been from MSM “sex”. I use quotations for “sex” because as argued in a blog I wrote a week ago it is not possible for homosexuals to “have sex” in any proper sense of the term. In short, the intent of the language change and the acquiescence of the Red Cross and so many other “health” professionals has been to remove stigma from homosexual behaviour and to pretend that AIDS is “everyone’s disease.” Don’t believe it. At least in Western countries it is overwhelmingly a disease of homosexual males, and thousands of these poor souls have died of AIDS in the past 30 years (though AIDS is still a very minor disease by ordinary standards. Far more die every year of breast and prostate cancer, for example, than die of AIDS, though these diseases are given about a tenth of the money for research that is given for AIDS).
To top all this horrendous discussion off – and this, too is hush-hush due to the fact that there is by now an enormous HIV-AIDS industry/bureaucracy/and national-international aid machinery established to “conquer AIDS” – it is by no means clear at all that HIV is the “cause” of AIDS. Indeed, also getting off the ground in the 1980s was a group that then called itself “Rethinking -AIDS”. They have another name now. But this is a collection of four or five-hundred established scientists who are pretty certain that HIV is NOT the cause of AIDS. About 50 of them, including Luc Montagnier, the French scientist given many awards as the co-discoverer of the HIV virus, met in Amsterdam in 1992 at an “alternative” AIDS conference to assail the “HIV dogma.” An in-depth study of this controversy is by Peter Duesberg, Inventing the AIDS Virus (Washington: Regnery publishing, 1996). Duesberg, though a distinguished professor at Berkeley, has become a pariah in the AIDS establishment for his work. Instead of facing the arguments, the full force of denkverboten (the German word for “forbidding of thought”) has been brought to bear on his work and career by his opponents.
Their position is drawn from two sources. First, the absence of proof. As Nobel Laureate Kary Mullis (who wrote the foreward to Duesberg’s book) put it: “If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There are no such documents.” (London Sunday Times, Nov.28, 1993). You can access lots of similar material, at www.virusmyth.net including in-depth essays on the African “Aids” crisis (quotes used here for reasons you will see if you study up on the way Africa has no standard scientific requirement for distinguishing AIDS from the many other diseases that are rampant there).
And second, it seems to be the case that even if HIV is “associated” with AIDS, it may not manifest, or “cause” AIDS and this conclusion arises because so many people in whom the HIV virus may be found, but who do not practice homosexuality, never get AIDS, though it is quite likely to manifest if you are given blood from an active homosexual with AIDS. The main argument of HIV-theory opponents is that “co-factors” are required in combination with the virus and then you will likely come down with AIDS. But not without them. What are the co-factors? They are behaviours and practices associated mostly with male homosexuality: primarily frequent anal sex, heavy drug use, especially nitrates used to heighten the senses, multiple sex partners, heavy alcohol use, chronic fatigue, poor diet, etc., etc.
Getting at the truth is a lot of work.
Reader Comments (2)
I hope nobody has been confused by my posts.
Thank you for the objective and honest exposition of the truth about HIV. Sometimes the truth is best raw and unprocessed.
I wonder how many people have died because the MSM (media) was too politically correct to report the truth that MSM (sex) is the largest common factor in the AIDS crisis world-wide.
For clarity's sake, and for some of your readers who are coming into this issue for the first time (yours truly), it would be preferable to outline the relationship of AIDS-HIV a little better. Specificaly, your last paragraph - HIV may be associated with AIDS but not cause it.