“Hiv Testing” is Dangerous to Your Health

"Hiv Testing" is Dangerous to Your Health

Source: http://liamscheff.com/content/view/113/
Please visit Liam Scheff's blog for more informative and well written articles.

Part 1:

December 2007, Associated Press:

"WORCESTER, Mass. (AP) — Audrey Serrano received HIV treatments for almost nine years before receiving a stunning diagnosis: She never actually had the virus that causes AIDS."

File under:

Testing is Dangerous

The Associated Press reports that a Boston-area woman who has been taking "Aids drugs" (that's FDA Black-Box labeled drugs, to you and me), for years has been profoundly damaged by them.

And she's been taking them for no reason, whatsoever: She was never really "Hiv positive."

So why is she sick? Look up "FDA Black-Box drugs" for a short answer; it's the designation for drugs that kill or permanently injure patients who take them. You can line that up against the Aids industry's typical line, "Life-Saving Aids Drugs," and see where reality ends and advertising begins.

So, "Hiv tests" are not accurate? And Aids drugs kill? Never heard that on "Queer as Folk." But is it true?

Illness and death from "life-saving" drugs? Well, yes, that's what the Black Box is for.

Tests that test for nothing? Well, yes, the tests test for nothing particular, and then everything else, too.

Among those able to test "positive" without being positive, according to the sanctified medical literature:

* "Dogs, mice, babies, goats and cows, milkmaids, alcoholics, arthritics, moms, people with worms, '1,000 white suburban housewives,' vaccine-recipients, drug addicts," and then anyone else really, for "reasons that are unclear."1

What then makes someone a "true positive" versus a "false positive?" Read the story. The doctor who gave the false diagnosis states that the Aids drug-damaged but "not really infected" woman "convinced" the doctor of her "positivity."

How do you "convince" someone that you are infected?

With the actual, standardized, reproducible test result? Nope, no, clearly not. So then how?

With your behavior, your ethnic/sexual background, and your clinical history.

"She convinced me that she was HIV (positive)," Lai [the doctor who gave the diagnosis] told the court, saying Serrano told her that she had worked as a prostitute, her partner also had AIDS and that she had suffered three bouts of a type of pneumonia that was typically associated with those infected by the virus.

What virus? What test is used to diagnosis infection? Certainly not the one used here…

Why is pneumonia "associated with a virus" (that can't be tested for), that doesn't cause pneumonia?

Because it's easy to do, among certain people - the poor, drug addicts, the gay community, and now Blacks and Hispanics - to convince them (or, really, to convince ourselves), that anything and everything that's wrong with them is caused by…sex.

So, it's not the test that does it. It's the perception of your behavior by the medical authority; your clinical history, your place of residence, and your sexual orientation.

You may be sick, with the same types of pneumonia that are "associated with AIDS" in people in these "high risk" groups, but if the doctor isn't "convinced" that it's your sex life that's causing you to be occasionally ill…well, then, you're just going to be treated for your pneumonia.

If the doc likes you for the "Aids risk group" (poor, minority, gay, African), then you are in for life. And when you die on the drugs, which you will do sooner or later, you've died of "Aids."

Chalk one up for the Aids cabal. Every death is a validation for their scheme. Every survivor or person who rejects their drugs and their diagnosis is a "denialist." Even when they live long and healthy lives. (Or, especially then).

But not Audrey Serrano, bless her soul. She's wriggling out from under the mess, and standing up against the machine. I'm sure they're shivering in their steel-toed boots, over at "Aidstruth."

Is this the beginning of the end for the human rights violation and medical crime known as "Hiv testing?" Stay tuned.

1 More on the dubious 'art' known as "Hiv Testing": Part One: Knowing is Beautiful | Part Two: Sex Crimes | Hiv Testing Review and Analysis

Part 2:

December, 2007, From the Associated Press

* BOSTON – A jury awarded $2.5 million in damages Wednesday to a woman who received HIV treatments for almost nine years before discovering she never actually had the virus that causes AIDS.

* In her lawsuit against a doctor who treated her, Audrey Serrano said the powerful combination of drugs she took triggered a string of ailments, including depression, chronic fatigue, loss of weight and appetite and inflammation of the intestine.

* Serrano, 45, said she cried after hearing the verdict in Worcester Superior Court and was gratified that the jury believed her.

* "I'm going to finish my school and I am going to continue to help others," Serrano said in a telephone interview from her Fitchburg home. "I am going to find another doctor that will help me."

I'm sure they're reeling over in Aidsland today. But this is what a little honesty applied to the Aids paradigm reveals: It's a brutal, deadly sham.