Fauci on the state of the search for an “HIV vaccine”

From summer 2022

I was recently alerted to the following fifteen minute long virtual interview with Anthony Fauci at the 2022 AIDS conference, which was held in Montreal. He is interviewed below by Christina Mozaffari for HIV.gov. The video is embedded below, and my commentary is below the video. Time stamps are approximate but as close as I could get them. This is going to be interesting.

Right off the bat, he is introduced as having been “trying to end the HIV epidemic from the very beginning.” It’s been forty years and we’ve made no progress; I’d say that kind of record of success ought to lose a person their job, but he retired, so there’s that.

At the 1:00 mark, Fauci admits right off the bat that “all of the scientists agree that this issue is one of the most challenging scientific questions of our time,” because of the alleged “lack of a robust immune response” in the host, which he then blames for the fact that there’s been “no spontaneous clearing of virus” despite “tens and tens of millions” of infections. There’s an alternative explanation that makes a lot more sense, and that is that HIV tests are detecting something endogenous, as the late Etienne de Harven suggested many times.

He then says something that to me is truly astonishing. He says, I quote, “One has to design a vaccine that actually does better than what natural immunity to an infection does.” Well, he’s certainly got an uphill battle. The entire premise of vaccine science (regardless of your opinion on vaccines, what I am saying is true) is that the vaccine is supposed to mimic the natural immune response, which necessarily results in it being no better than natural immunity, and usually worse. Fauci himself famously admitted this regarding the flu vaccine. However, as we know, the concept of natural immunity was shunted to the side by the mainstream medical community during COVID, and I can’t help but thinking that this is all connected. He’ll confirm my suspicion later on in the interview.

At the 3:00 mark, he refers again to the fact that “HIV infection” immediately creates a “reservoir” (I got so sick of hearing him say that word by the end) that can’t be cleared. He says that so far, we haven’t figured out how to clear that, even when the patient has “undetectable viremia.” Note his use of the word viremia here when what he is referring to is obviously viral load, which can only be measured after mass amplification of genetic material via PCR. Viremia refers to actual whole infectious virus, which as we know thanks to Duesberg and the Perth Group, is undetectable in “HIV positive” individuals. That’s why we use PCR in the first place!

Most of this interview focuses on the failed attempt to find a vaccine for “HIV.” He talks about the famous RV144 trial in Thailand, which he refers to as having been promising, despite also stating that the trial indicated only 31% efficacy. Perhaps this is on the high end for “HIV” vaccine trials, because goodness knows enough of them were abandoned for futility. Not to be deterred by these underwhelming results, studies based on RV144 were undertaken in several countries and the original trial proved to be unable to be replicated. That’s an ongoing theme in “HIV science.” There is definitely a reproducibility problem.

At 5:24 he flat out admits that “We may not ever get where we want to be with an HIV vaccine.” “There’s no guarantee.” You think???

Once we get to the 6:00 mark, the elephant in the room of COVID and the COVID vaccines is allowed to be seen. He refers to attempting “structure based vaccine design,” one example of which is the targeting of the spike protein of SARS-Cov-2 using mRNA technology. He mentioned the failure of such “structure based vaccine design” in developing such a vaccine for “HIV,” and, in the next breath, states that “That technology was extremely important in getting us, very rapidly, to a vaccine for COVID.” Okay, he didn’t actually say anything false there; the vaccines were produced and rolled out in record time, but he and I part ways in that I don’t think that was a good thing. “The fact that we didn’t get a vaccine for HIV was critical in getting us a vaccine for COVID.” Say what???

I’m just going to spend a little bit more time on his comments about COVID, because they are very illuminating. Verbatim (at 7:00): “The high success of an mRNA vaccine for COVID is creating a lot of excitement in the HIV vaccine community of being able to get a safe, broadly neutralizing HIV vaccine using some of the things we’ve learned from COVID.” I wonder what those “things we’ve learned” are—the ability to produce a vaccine that doesn’t stop transmission and has a terrible side effect profile? I think the emphasis on the COVID vaccines is very telling. The whole world might have never fallen for the official COVID narrative so easily had it not been for the dress rehearsal that has been the total bungling of the real AIDS epidemic, and now, according to Fauci, “COVID is going to help us with HIV.” Or something.

I’m almost done. Most of the rest of the video is just Fauci pontificating, but he says a few more interesting things. At 9:00 he admits that we are (still, after forty years) “a long way” from either a cure or a vaccine, which as you may recall were promised to have eventuated by 1986. Perhaps the failures in achieving either of these goals is a hint that we’re chasing the wrong thing?

Finally, at about 10:00, after mentioning again the “striking success with the COVID vaccine,” he mentions PrEP. I’m surprised it took this long, and that he spent so little time on it. I thought PrEP was supposed to be effectively perfect? Why do we care about a vaccine—which Fauci admits may never happen—if PrEP is so spectacular? The interview limps to a close; the only other thing worth mentioning is that in the last minute and a half, Ms. Mozaffari asks Fauci to “look into his crystal ball” as to what advances we can expect in two years at the next AIDS conference, and, predictably, it’s all about the drugs; in particular, long lasting injectables for PrEP and for ART. “I’d like to see an injectable that is long lasting to at least six months.” We’ll be seeing lawsuits on those in the near future, I can all but guarantee.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the stellar state of AIDS science in the 2020s. No vaccine, no cure, only more and more regimens of toxic drugs with the end goal being “retention in care.” We can do better than that, but the AIDS establishment needs to get out of its own way because thus far, all they’ve given us are failures on every level.

To support my work on Substack, please purchase my book for yourself or for a friend, and leave a review on Amazon. You can learn about efforts to ban my book here. You can also buy my new book Almost Cancelled. You can also upgrade to paid at any time.

If you’re a new reader and would like some background as to my views on HIV AIDS, including the “existence” question, please refer to this post and the links contained therein.