I was diagnosed HIV positive in 2006 and lived without ARV for about 17 years. But in March 2023 I was diagnosed with cancer(not sure it is HIV related) and started ARV along with the Chemo and Radiation therapy. It has been 4 months since I started ARV and I want to stop taking the drugs because the drug I gave me hyperlipidemia.(I got other light side effects too but they are endurable)Right before I started my ARV my CD4 count was 33 which is extremely low.If HIV doesn’t exist why my CD4 count is so low compared to other normal people?During 17 years I believed that the HIV theory was all a lie because I was kind of living evidence.But now, I am so confused and hope to find the right answer.Is there anyone who can help me with this?
HIV has never been properly isolated and characterized. Thus the "test" is meaningless. AIDS has nothing to do with contagion, and has a different definition depending on what country you are "diagnosed" in. Fraud, fraud, fraud.
Do I think the phenomenon of AIDS (acquired immune deficiency) is, or could possibly be caused by a transmissible agent?
Having studied AIDS for 3 years I have come to two conclusions.
A) HIV is a Potemkin virus. Gallo only had the French virus and the French virus was, as Montagnier admitted, a contaminant.
B) AIDS was immune-system burn out. The burn out was caused by semen, STD's, viral infections (but not HIV), drugs, malnutrition, malaria, Factor 8.
The gay males who got AIDS were the ones who engaged in the highest levels of unprotected sexual activity and drug taking. The IVDUs who got AIDS were the ones who shared the most needles.
As my character Joe Summer says in Chapter Five of The Iceberg Guy, the quickest way to end the AIDS epidemic in 1981 (even before it was called AIDS) was to ‘‘Close down the gay bathhouses. Clean up the drug users’ shooting galleries.’’ These were the amplification systems of AIDS.
As JR Thompson said: 'The existence of a small subset of individuals within the gay community which exhibited sexual activity much greater than that of the average greatly facilitated the viability of the epidemic.'
'What about the phenomenon of HIV positivity? Could it be caused by a transmissible agent? And if not, what is causing these phenomena?'
Anyone who has researched this topic knows that the HIV test is non-specific and different criteria are applied to different demographics.
I have written one thriller 'A Dive Into Darkness' based upon my research which is due to be published in the early part of next year.
I have started work on my second 'AIDS' novel, The Iceberg Guy, which I am serialising on Substack.
The Iceberg Guy is a dramatized, partly fictionalised, account of the AIDS pandemic up to April 23rd 1984.
Once this is completed I will then move onto a non-fiction account of my research,
'AIDSGATE: the shocking true story of how a clique of scientists, medics, public health officials, activists, politicians and celebrities were able to fake the HIV pandemic.'
'if I don’t have any engagement within a day or so I’ll delete the thread.'
How about some engagement from you Rebecca with my work? I have read hundreds of papers including JR Thompson, watched hundreds of videos, and read Shilts, Gallo, Montagnier, France, Duesberg, Crewdson et al.
I would love to appear on a podcast to discuss my main finding which is that the CDC ignored, in fact buried, covered up, for a variety of reasons - political, personal, ignorance, economic, fear of being labelled homophobic - the most obvious clues of all - CMV and poppers. Clues that most AIDS 'experts' have also ignored or dismissed, including yourself and Eric Coppolino, who was very abrupt in his dismissal of me and my research.
Joe Sonneband was absolutely correct in 1981. He only moderated his stance subsequently, due to financial pressures.
I am very happy to engage with anyone about my theories, answer any questions, as my research is evidence driven and absolutely watertight. There are no conspiracy theories here.
1. HIV has not been isolated/purified according to Koch's postulates
2. Detection of HIV has always relied on indirect markers (e.g. "viral load")
3. HIV has never been directly isolated from patients
4. HIV infection statistics have remained stable -- around one million in the US -- for over three decades, which indicates a non-transmissible agent (if it were transmissible, the number of cases should increase)
5. More plausible explanations for compromised immune systems in AIDS patients have never been ruled out/factored into a differential diagnosis of the condition: for example, illegal and prescription (PREP, i.e.) drug-induced loss of immune function
On 2 viral load or anti bodies, is the load calculated based on virus DNA strands found on the sample
1&3 refer to isolation/purified why a particular behavior of a blood sample in a test can't be regarded as some form of isolation, KOCH Postulate can be the only way, I mean same method use gives different results on different blood samples, some things we can't see but feel their effects
4 stagnant stats in USA, have you checked outside USA a country like RSA with 200 000 new infections yearly, maybe prevention and treatment strategies played a huge role in maintaining that number, infact for me it should be lower look at how UK and other European countries some even less than 100 thousand, look how far is Thailand coming from. We mustn't over rely on the isolation the "Koch way " medical technology have evolved, I now respond to you within second of your post, why can't we move as such in medicine? Whatever react positive to the test that was developed using first patients blood is and has killed over 40 millions global citizens with 38 millions still infected so we can't deny HIV/Aids pandemic, let me declare I'm not HIV activist but a person who is affected by this greatly
Most of the AIDS defining diseases are of course transmissible. Kaposi's Sarcoma of course is not, being a cancer. It think almost all the rest are transmissible. So, I guess you could say that AIDS is infectious? AIDS is real, HIV is not.
As to your second question, as to what is causing HIV+ results: the tests are just reacting to a multitude of things. Pregnancy is a known cause of an HIV+ result. So are lots of things. It sure as hell is not HIV.
Tests reacts to multiple issues including pregnancy, then why other people who have number of children with one loyal partner still test negative both husband and wife, with wife having nine kids, other factors have they been proven to give false positive let's say flue, was a there ever a study of group of people with flue testing positive and not take Arvs until the flue is gone and go back to test and be negative what is your theory based on? If the pregnancy theory was true almost of women would be positive from 1984 or whenever
How often are women getting tested for HIV who are in a marriage? 'HIV' positivity being associated with AIDS is an artifact of how the tests were defined and applied. Gallo simply extracted antigens and reacting antibodies from a pool of very sick men, declared them from a new virus, and then produced a tests that was then selectively applied to a particular group. It's a dog chasing its tale, but positivity isn't proof a viral infection has taken place.
Every pregnant woman in my country, wether married or not is subjected to HIV test, if test as you put is a antigens from a sick person and one have reacting antibodies to that antigens how then do you guys suggest that a positive reaction to that test doesn't mean a person is having a "foreign antigene /infection wether you call that virus or something else, the reaction tells that a person have a sickness in their body.
Yes it’s contiguous. Too many people with hiv negative results and with aids symptoms right after a sexual encounter. It doesn’t even need to be a high risk encounter
Lest I forget the girlfriend is been fighting chest infection for almost a year now since her diagnosis, coughing daily produces bad phlegms,she is relactend in taking ARVs, from where I'm standing she doesn't look healthy also she lost significant amount of weight so excuse for not being convinced by Karry Mullis, Perth Group whether their theory was scientifically proven I haven't come across such beside paper theories, in real life I see people sick and dying credited to their HIV diagnosis, my own young sister have 4 kids with 10 years age difference from the oldest to the youngest with one partner and they are both negative with their kids
3 AIDS without HIV I doubt it is contagious , that can be due to poison which can destroy organs or it could be due to malnutrition or recreational drugs abuse, what I'm saying is that sexual transmission or exposure to blood of such a person will not lead to another be declared as having AIDS
I'm not clear whether your question is HIV positivity transmittable or AIDS contagious? Any way my response is yes
1 HIV as a pathogenic virus is transmittable from one person to another via contaminated bodily fluids semen or blood,that means HIV positivity is transmittable
2 AIDS is a development of disease from HIV infection so the uncontrolled virus leads to AIDS, it therefore means AIDS is contagious.
We've been here before, what evidence one needs after 40 years of people dying from this, I have lost count of people who have died from this virus, my ex girlfriend was recently diagnosed positive almost 18 months ago, before that she was negative even though she have autoimmune condition (ulcerative colitis) and was once hospital for it 3 weeks just 2 years ago, and she was exposed to HIV via sexual encounters with the current boyfriend who believed these theories you are referring me to, so there's my proof of sexually transmission, my ex had a relationship with a person who was diagnosed HIV positive long ago and he read All the Anti Aids materials and never believed HIV is real until he infected his girlfriend (my ex) now he is stressed and sickly lost hell lot of weight he can barely stand on his own two feet
So what exactly proves to you that after years of his being “infected” with a “virus” that killed his wife years ago the same “virus” that hasn’t harmed him in nearly a decade since it killed his wife is suddenly causing his illness?
What proved to you that “hiv” and not some other factor is responsible for his sickness? Especially after all these years living with a theoretical phantom originally said to kill within six months to two years after infection?
I have lost countless friends and heroes, all of them loved ones to fear of this theoretical “hiv virus”. The one thing they all had in common was following prescribed treatment for an often undetectable phantom that failed every expectation, threat and promise made in the theory proposing the existence of a sexually transmitted epidemic immune failure disease causing biological agent.
How long ago was this “person who was diagnosed HIV positive long ago” diagnosed hiv positive? By what testing method? How was “infection” confirmed?
Why didn’t the hiv phantom kill the infected within six months to two years after infection as the 1984 proposed theory claims?
Want to see the evidence supporting my dissent from the hiv theory of AIDS causation? The absolute failure of everything predicted, promised and threatened in the 1984 proposed theory that could/would prove the theory true is all the evidence that anyone who is not blinded by religious dogma that they have been unquestioningly force fed for forty years should need.
Do you even know what the 1984 proposed theory claims will prove itself true?
I don't know how long but his previous wife died of AIDS related sickness that was 7 years ago so it obvious he must have been infected before that as well, 1984 and later have different predictions currently they say latency can be 10 years provided such person is living a good healthy life
2 Testing method is standard in South Africa blood sample is sent to lab for testing unfortunately I don't know lab processes but from there your results are either positive or negative.
3 How do we constantly have growing numbers of HIV positive people in the world particularly in Africa if the theory failed, AIDS might not be as aggressive as it was in the 80 to early 2000s, maybe it due to treatment intervention or prevention methods have played huge role in averting early predictions so the "failure" have its explanation, most norm now is use of condoms, I've explained this to you before.
“2 Testing method is standard in South Africa blood sample is sent to lab for testing unfortunately I don't know lab processes but from there your results are either positive or negative.”
What exactly are the tests testing for?
When, where, how and by who was a diagnostic Gold Standard established with purified isolate of an hiv viral agent?
Where is yours beside Karry Mullis story, remember he didn't prove anything he was just theorising about not finding a paper, whilst we see daily people dying of Aids related illnesses
How about the fact that instead of being decimated by a sexually transmitted ”hiv” by the year 2000 as predicted in the 1984 proposed theory of hiv causing AIDS the population of Africa has more than doubled?
But interventions were made after 1984, Like use of nevarapine for newly born babies from Infected mothers, treatment that leads to U=U means positive people can have babes with negative people without infecting each other's
So “positive people can have babies with negative people” as long as the newborn is presumed to be infected with a deadly disease and receives immediate treatment with pharmaceuticals.
But you don’t work for the pharmaceutical industry?
No I don't work in the medical fraternity at all, yes the newborn is given Arvs in a syrup form you don't have to work in the Pharmaceutical industry to know that 🤣🤣🤣, if the mother who is positive that is the standard procedure, if it's the man who is positive with suppressed viral load undetectable and the mother not infected no need for the baby to be given the Arvs syrup because the mother is negative
Kindly explain how despite failure of everything predicted, promised, expected and threatened in the 1984 proposed but terribly flawed hiv theory of disease causation that would/could demonstrate the theory true you still beLIEve it to be true.
If the hiv/AIDS Theory was correct wouldn’t we all be dead by now? The 1984 proposed theory predicted human population would be decimated by hiv/AIDS by turn of the last century. Do you seriously beLIEve that condoms used primarily in the population where the phantom is most prevalent prevented spread to general population while every other sexually transmitted infection increased in general population?
If you only beLIEve something because it is all you have been unquestioningly taught but you cannot provide science, fact and verifiable data to support your beLIEf while you reject but cannot refute or even demonstrate comprehension of the science, extensively researched fact and verifiable data that totally refutes your blind-faith beLIEf how is your beLIEf anything other than your religion?
It all comes down to individual behavior, not necessarily sex, there's nothing wrong with natural sex with one loyal partner, but sleeping around without protection in a form of condoms now prep (side effects) something else, WHO have said 40 millions of people have died is that not of epidemic proportions?
I was diagnosed HIV positive in 2006 and lived without ARV for about 17 years. But in March 2023 I was diagnosed with cancer(not sure it is HIV related) and started ARV along with the Chemo and Radiation therapy. It has been 4 months since I started ARV and I want to stop taking the drugs because the drug I gave me hyperlipidemia.(I got other light side effects too but they are endurable)Right before I started my ARV my CD4 count was 33 which is extremely low.If HIV doesn’t exist why my CD4 count is so low compared to other normal people?During 17 years I believed that the HIV theory was all a lie because I was kind of living evidence.But now, I am so confused and hope to find the right answer.Is there anyone who can help me with this?
What kind of cancer?
Viruses as defined have never been proven to exist.
So no.
HIV has never been properly isolated and characterized. Thus the "test" is meaningless. AIDS has nothing to do with contagion, and has a different definition depending on what country you are "diagnosed" in. Fraud, fraud, fraud.
Do I think the phenomenon of AIDS (acquired immune deficiency) is, or could possibly be caused by a transmissible agent?
Having studied AIDS for 3 years I have come to two conclusions.
A) HIV is a Potemkin virus. Gallo only had the French virus and the French virus was, as Montagnier admitted, a contaminant.
B) AIDS was immune-system burn out. The burn out was caused by semen, STD's, viral infections (but not HIV), drugs, malnutrition, malaria, Factor 8.
The gay males who got AIDS were the ones who engaged in the highest levels of unprotected sexual activity and drug taking. The IVDUs who got AIDS were the ones who shared the most needles.
As my character Joe Summer says in Chapter Five of The Iceberg Guy, the quickest way to end the AIDS epidemic in 1981 (even before it was called AIDS) was to ‘‘Close down the gay bathhouses. Clean up the drug users’ shooting galleries.’’ These were the amplification systems of AIDS.
As JR Thompson said: 'The existence of a small subset of individuals within the gay community which exhibited sexual activity much greater than that of the average greatly facilitated the viability of the epidemic.'
'What about the phenomenon of HIV positivity? Could it be caused by a transmissible agent? And if not, what is causing these phenomena?'
Anyone who has researched this topic knows that the HIV test is non-specific and different criteria are applied to different demographics.
I have written one thriller 'A Dive Into Darkness' based upon my research which is due to be published in the early part of next year.
I have started work on my second 'AIDS' novel, The Iceberg Guy, which I am serialising on Substack.
Here is the link to the first chapter. https://cascades.substack.com/p/the-iceberg-guy-1
The Iceberg Guy is a dramatized, partly fictionalised, account of the AIDS pandemic up to April 23rd 1984.
Once this is completed I will then move onto a non-fiction account of my research,
'AIDSGATE: the shocking true story of how a clique of scientists, medics, public health officials, activists, politicians and celebrities were able to fake the HIV pandemic.'
'if I don’t have any engagement within a day or so I’ll delete the thread.'
How about some engagement from you Rebecca with my work? I have read hundreds of papers including JR Thompson, watched hundreds of videos, and read Shilts, Gallo, Montagnier, France, Duesberg, Crewdson et al.
I would love to appear on a podcast to discuss my main finding which is that the CDC ignored, in fact buried, covered up, for a variety of reasons - political, personal, ignorance, economic, fear of being labelled homophobic - the most obvious clues of all - CMV and poppers. Clues that most AIDS 'experts' have also ignored or dismissed, including yourself and Eric Coppolino, who was very abrupt in his dismissal of me and my research.
Joe Sonneband was absolutely correct in 1981. He only moderated his stance subsequently, due to financial pressures.
I am very happy to engage with anyone about my theories, answer any questions, as my research is evidence driven and absolutely watertight. There are no conspiracy theories here.
Share your facts
My understanding is that:
1. HIV has not been isolated/purified according to Koch's postulates
2. Detection of HIV has always relied on indirect markers (e.g. "viral load")
3. HIV has never been directly isolated from patients
4. HIV infection statistics have remained stable -- around one million in the US -- for over three decades, which indicates a non-transmissible agent (if it were transmissible, the number of cases should increase)
5. More plausible explanations for compromised immune systems in AIDS patients have never been ruled out/factored into a differential diagnosis of the condition: for example, illegal and prescription (PREP, i.e.) drug-induced loss of immune function
On 2 viral load or anti bodies, is the load calculated based on virus DNA strands found on the sample
1&3 refer to isolation/purified why a particular behavior of a blood sample in a test can't be regarded as some form of isolation, KOCH Postulate can be the only way, I mean same method use gives different results on different blood samples, some things we can't see but feel their effects
4 stagnant stats in USA, have you checked outside USA a country like RSA with 200 000 new infections yearly, maybe prevention and treatment strategies played a huge role in maintaining that number, infact for me it should be lower look at how UK and other European countries some even less than 100 thousand, look how far is Thailand coming from. We mustn't over rely on the isolation the "Koch way " medical technology have evolved, I now respond to you within second of your post, why can't we move as such in medicine? Whatever react positive to the test that was developed using first patients blood is and has killed over 40 millions global citizens with 38 millions still infected so we can't deny HIV/Aids pandemic, let me declare I'm not HIV activist but a person who is affected by this greatly
Most of the AIDS defining diseases are of course transmissible. Kaposi's Sarcoma of course is not, being a cancer. It think almost all the rest are transmissible. So, I guess you could say that AIDS is infectious? AIDS is real, HIV is not.
As to your second question, as to what is causing HIV+ results: the tests are just reacting to a multitude of things. Pregnancy is a known cause of an HIV+ result. So are lots of things. It sure as hell is not HIV.
Dementia is an AIDS defining disease. Is dementia transmissible?
Almost all
No. Dementia is not transmissible.
Yes it's not, the post you respond to said almost all, that will exclude dementia doesn't it?
How does a white blood cell killing virus cause dementia?
Anyone critically sick lose some ability of their mind to a certain extent
I agree with you but not on HIV, because it leads to AIDS
Tests reacts to multiple issues including pregnancy, then why other people who have number of children with one loyal partner still test negative both husband and wife, with wife having nine kids, other factors have they been proven to give false positive let's say flue, was a there ever a study of group of people with flue testing positive and not take Arvs until the flue is gone and go back to test and be negative what is your theory based on? If the pregnancy theory was true almost of women would be positive from 1984 or whenever
How often are women getting tested for HIV who are in a marriage? 'HIV' positivity being associated with AIDS is an artifact of how the tests were defined and applied. Gallo simply extracted antigens and reacting antibodies from a pool of very sick men, declared them from a new virus, and then produced a tests that was then selectively applied to a particular group. It's a dog chasing its tale, but positivity isn't proof a viral infection has taken place.
Every pregnant woman in my country, wether married or not is subjected to HIV test, if test as you put is a antigens from a sick person and one have reacting antibodies to that antigens how then do you guys suggest that a positive reaction to that test doesn't mean a person is having a "foreign antigene /infection wether you call that virus or something else, the reaction tells that a person have a sickness in their body.
Why the “AIDS test” doesn’t work in Africa
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/newsletters/2001-01.pdf
Yes it’s contiguous. Too many people with hiv negative results and with aids symptoms right after a sexual encounter. It doesn’t even need to be a high risk encounter
Maybe it's the overall behavior and treatment of the body. Makes more sense.
What do you mean overall behavior?
Drugs, alcohol, frequent aggressive sex, lack of sleep, poor diet, etc.
Lest I forget the girlfriend is been fighting chest infection for almost a year now since her diagnosis, coughing daily produces bad phlegms,she is relactend in taking ARVs, from where I'm standing she doesn't look healthy also she lost significant amount of weight so excuse for not being convinced by Karry Mullis, Perth Group whether their theory was scientifically proven I haven't come across such beside paper theories, in real life I see people sick and dying credited to their HIV diagnosis, my own young sister have 4 kids with 10 years age difference from the oldest to the youngest with one partner and they are both negative with their kids
Just to add on the above response
3 AIDS without HIV I doubt it is contagious , that can be due to poison which can destroy organs or it could be due to malnutrition or recreational drugs abuse, what I'm saying is that sexual transmission or exposure to blood of such a person will not lead to another be declared as having AIDS
I'm not clear whether your question is HIV positivity transmittable or AIDS contagious? Any way my response is yes
1 HIV as a pathogenic virus is transmittable from one person to another via contaminated bodily fluids semen or blood,that means HIV positivity is transmittable
2 AIDS is a development of disease from HIV infection so the uncontrolled virus leads to AIDS, it therefore means AIDS is contagious.
Could you kindly provide the science, fact and verifiable data to confirm your assertion?
No, you can not.
Because it doesn’t exist.
http://www.free-news.org/mulluk01.htm
We've been here before, what evidence one needs after 40 years of people dying from this, I have lost count of people who have died from this virus, my ex girlfriend was recently diagnosed positive almost 18 months ago, before that she was negative even though she have autoimmune condition (ulcerative colitis) and was once hospital for it 3 weeks just 2 years ago, and she was exposed to HIV via sexual encounters with the current boyfriend who believed these theories you are referring me to, so there's my proof of sexually transmission, my ex had a relationship with a person who was diagnosed HIV positive long ago and he read All the Anti Aids materials and never believed HIV is real until he infected his girlfriend (my ex) now he is stressed and sickly lost hell lot of weight he can barely stand on his own two feet
So what exactly proves to you that after years of his being “infected” with a “virus” that killed his wife years ago the same “virus” that hasn’t harmed him in nearly a decade since it killed his wife is suddenly causing his illness?
What proved to you that “hiv” and not some other factor is responsible for his sickness? Especially after all these years living with a theoretical phantom originally said to kill within six months to two years after infection?
I have lost countless friends and heroes, all of them loved ones to fear of this theoretical “hiv virus”. The one thing they all had in common was following prescribed treatment for an often undetectable phantom that failed every expectation, threat and promise made in the theory proposing the existence of a sexually transmitted epidemic immune failure disease causing biological agent.
How long ago was this “person who was diagnosed HIV positive long ago” diagnosed hiv positive? By what testing method? How was “infection” confirmed?
Why didn’t the hiv phantom kill the infected within six months to two years after infection as the 1984 proposed theory claims?
Want to see the evidence supporting my dissent from the hiv theory of AIDS causation? The absolute failure of everything predicted, promised and threatened in the 1984 proposed theory that could/would prove the theory true is all the evidence that anyone who is not blinded by religious dogma that they have been unquestioningly force fed for forty years should need.
Do you even know what the 1984 proposed theory claims will prove itself true?
I don't know how long but his previous wife died of AIDS related sickness that was 7 years ago so it obvious he must have been infected before that as well, 1984 and later have different predictions currently they say latency can be 10 years provided such person is living a good healthy life
2 Testing method is standard in South Africa blood sample is sent to lab for testing unfortunately I don't know lab processes but from there your results are either positive or negative.
3 How do we constantly have growing numbers of HIV positive people in the world particularly in Africa if the theory failed, AIDS might not be as aggressive as it was in the 80 to early 2000s, maybe it due to treatment intervention or prevention methods have played huge role in averting early predictions so the "failure" have its explanation, most norm now is use of condoms, I've explained this to you before.
Why the “AIDS test” doesn’t work in Africa.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/newsletters/2001-01.pdf
“2 Testing method is standard in South Africa blood sample is sent to lab for testing unfortunately I don't know lab processes but from there your results are either positive or negative.”
What exactly are the tests testing for?
When, where, how and by who was a diagnostic Gold Standard established with purified isolate of an hiv viral agent?
If condom use stopped spread of hiv why have other sexually transmitted infections increased among general population?
Use of condoms minimized the spread not necessarily stopped the spread, those who frequently use condoms like sex workers are least infected,
How did he live seven years with a virus theorized to kill within six months to two years after infection?
I wouldn't know whether he was taking treatment or not, maybe he defaulted on his treatment and his viral load increased and he became infectious
Where is yours beside Karry Mullis story, remember he didn't prove anything he was just theorising about not finding a paper, whilst we see daily people dying of Aids related illnesses
How about the fact that instead of being decimated by a sexually transmitted ”hiv” by the year 2000 as predicted in the 1984 proposed theory of hiv causing AIDS the population of Africa has more than doubled?
Shouldn’t all that sex be spreading death?
But interventions were made after 1984, Like use of nevarapine for newly born babies from Infected mothers, treatment that leads to U=U means positive people can have babes with negative people without infecting each other's
So “positive people can have babies with negative people” as long as the newborn is presumed to be infected with a deadly disease and receives immediate treatment with pharmaceuticals.
But you don’t work for the pharmaceutical industry?
No I don't work in the medical fraternity at all, yes the newborn is given Arvs in a syrup form you don't have to work in the Pharmaceutical industry to know that 🤣🤣🤣, if the mother who is positive that is the standard procedure, if it's the man who is positive with suppressed viral load undetectable and the mother not infected no need for the baby to be given the Arvs syrup because the mother is negative
Wow! you really are a drug pusher.
Kindly explain how despite failure of everything predicted, promised, expected and threatened in the 1984 proposed but terribly flawed hiv theory of disease causation that would/could demonstrate the theory true you still beLIEve it to be true.
If the hiv/AIDS Theory was correct wouldn’t we all be dead by now? The 1984 proposed theory predicted human population would be decimated by hiv/AIDS by turn of the last century. Do you seriously beLIEve that condoms used primarily in the population where the phantom is most prevalent prevented spread to general population while every other sexually transmitted infection increased in general population?
If you only beLIEve something because it is all you have been unquestioningly taught but you cannot provide science, fact and verifiable data to support your beLIEf while you reject but cannot refute or even demonstrate comprehension of the science, extensively researched fact and verifiable data that totally refutes your blind-faith beLIEf how is your beLIEf anything other than your religion?
All religion is false religion.
Stop religion before it kills again!
It all comes down to individual behavior, not necessarily sex, there's nothing wrong with natural sex with one loyal partner, but sleeping around without protection in a form of condoms now prep (side effects) something else, WHO have said 40 millions of people have died is that not of epidemic proportions?
And in other religions demonic possession causes behavior clearly identifiable as hysteria.