Theatre of the absurd

mRNA vaccines for HIV, PrEPVacc, and “vaccine induced seropositivity.”

It was bound to happen eventually, and it appears that there are now three clinical trials underway testing mRNA vaccines for HIV. Given the at best mixed results these types of vaccines have had with Covid, I’m not sure what kind of uptake can be expected, assuming the trials are completed successfully—a feat that none of the dozens of vaccines that have been developed against HIV, beginning in the 1980s, has managed to accomplish.

One wonders also why even bother with an HIV vaccine, if PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) is as effective as is claimed—though not supported by the scientific literature, when one reads it critically. Amazingly, there have been and are ongoing attempts to combine PrEP with vaccines. The PrEPVacc study, which is happening in four African countries, aims to “rule out or encourage further development of two combination vaccine regimens for preventing HIV,” as well as to “[testing] whether a new form of oral PrEP, TAF/FTC (Descovy), is equivalent or more effective than the existing standard TDF/FTC (Truvada).” The problems with both the pioneering scientific studies that claim efficacies of PrEP at preventing seroconversion, as well as the dangers of these drugs to overall health have been discussed previously here. Refer also to the 23,000 plaintiff Truvada lawsuit for details of bone and kidney damage from tenofovir (generic for one component of both TDF and the supposedly “safer” TAF) for details.

The PrEPVacc study also mentions the possibility of "vaccine induced seropositivity", or “VISP,” which is a fancy way of saying that the vaccines may well cause the recipient to test HIV-antibody-positive, sometimes for as long as twenty years. This is curious because the criteria for a diagnosis of HIV-positive are currently a combination of two positive antibody tests; PCR, or the “viral load” test is not used for diagnosis for several reasons including that a nontrivial number of HIV-antibody-negative individuals have positive “viral loads.” The linked video about VISP continues by saying that the difference between VISP and “true” HIV-positivity in an individual can be ascertained via PCR test. The reason that this logic is bankrupt is left as an exercise for the reader.

Further, it is stated that “vaccine induced antibodies” cannot be transmitted sexually or via casual contact, but can be passed from mother to child—which is exactly what the medical literature says about plain old fashioned HIV antibodies. I refer the interested reader to the Perth Group’s monograph on mother-to-child transmission for an extremely detailed explanation of criteria for a diagnosis of HIV-positive as well as explanation of transmission of HIV-antibody-positivity. It would appear that the difference between “true” HIV antibodies and “VISP” is nonexistent. Chillingly, at the end of the video, the presenter admits that a diagnosis of VISP may well subject the patient to the exact types of discrimination in terms of stigma and denial of certain rights that accompany a diagnosis of HIV-positive.

Given the astounding lack of success in developing an HIV vaccine, the more concerning issue at this point is the aggressive marketing of PrEP. The push for PrEP becomes even creepier when one considers the fact that many AIDS activist organizations have blatantly called for censorship of advertisements regarding the Truvada lawsuit. There has even been a scholarly article analyzing the “Effect of Truvada lawsuit advertising on PrEP attitudes and decisions among sexual and gender minority youth and young adults at risk for HIV,” which appears to be nothing more than an obvious attempt at damage control. If these medications are truly beneficial and life saving as claimed, with minimal adverse effects, wouldn’t the knowledge of their damage to so many be required as part of “informed consent” on the part of the patient? Why would AIDS organizations want to suppress this information? Do they want a repeat of the AZT debacle?

One could be forgiven for imagining that perhaps there are some serious conflicts of interest regarding these AIDS organizations, as their primary purpose appears to be to strong-arm the public into blindly trusting pharmaceutical company propaganda, and to suppress any negative information regarding said companies’ very lucrative medications.

I am not a medical doctor, so it is not my place to advise anyone on what medications they put into their bodies. However, as a concerned citizen and as a mathematician that has seen serious flaws throughout all of HIV research including studies of pharmaceutical treatments, I will express serious concern regarding the suppression of information regarding the toxic effects of these medications. We have seen, in a dramatic fashion,over the past two years, that a treatment’s promised safety and efficacy can change dramatically for the worse as this treatment is administered to many and its effects are observed in real-time. The AZT scandal was tragic enough, but the pool of potential victims will increase dramatically when PrEP and any future “HIV vaccines” are eligible to the general population. At a minimum, everyone must be aware of the toxicities of PrEP drugs, as well as the possibility of appearing to have seroconverted following vaccine administration. Anything less is a massive violation of patient care and informed consent, and a crime against humanity.

Buy my new book at a limited presale price of $2.99 for Kindle here.