SCEPCOP Forum

Long story short, you wipe out an AIDS patient's bone marrow, and use stem cells from a donor that carries the Delta 32 (HIV immunity) mutation to regenerate their blood cells. The new leukocytes carry the Delta 32 mutation, and therefore HIV can't bind to them. HIV viral levels stop increasing.

Entire HIV conspiracy - gone. That's all, folks.

Unless you want to argue that THIS article was made up by the NWO to propagate the HIV conspiracy further. In which case, you need to be slapped with a large fish.

Fun fact though: Some people legitimately debate HIV's general notion of an STD, because of its . It is definitely a blood-borne disease, as noted by its 90% transmission rate in transfusion. Sex occasionally involves blood to blood contact. This is what causes the HIV transfer, not necessarily the sex itself. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

That blows my mind. I believed the newspapers in Kenya that AIDS was in the Nile perch people were eating. Now I learn that I could have eaten those wonderful smelling smoked fish. Live and learn.

Like any major illness HIV/AIDS has been horridly politicized, primarily due to the money it can generate for the medical industry... especially in the U.S. (the biggest culprit for Health Care Duplicity). Even in the early days of AIDS... back in the early and mid 1980s... there were successful treatments found in Mexico, France and elsewhere that the AMA/FDA refused to let into the U.S. Not because of bad science but due to the lack of kick-backs; the treatments hadn't gone through the various hoops everything must go through for "approval" which by the way, involves an average of 3-5 million dollars of company "investment" into the "studies"... 3-5 million that goes towards paying the salaries of "researchers" and of course, tax deferred investments on equipment and even specialty equipment development... then you have project "managers" (a.k.a. Lobbyists) taking their 6 digit annual salary out of that research budget.

We must also include the fact that the big companies can pay a bit extra (in "over time") so as to push the testing and reduce the time factor... which is why we end up with drugs on the market that are all the rave one year but two years later, are found to be killing folks by causing other... oft time "Chronic" issues. Amazingly, the company responsible has a "treatment" for this new condition...

... are you seeing the pattern?

Just as you can go to Mexico and get a literal cure for certain forms of cancer that are still being treated with harsh kimo and other such cruel methods in the U.S. A nation that is significantly wealthier and hosting far more assets when it comes to science & research. But "cures" aren't profit bearing, which is the point to all of this... we have a potential "fix" to something. A quasi-expensive and perhaps "uncomfortable" process but it can free one from the ravishes of a particular "bug" that expedites the aging and deterioration process of the human animal.

You won't find it here any time soon... and it won't be cheap when and if it does become available.

The pharmaceutical industry absolutely disgusts me. Especially Abilify. "If your current antidepressant isn't enough, try adding Abilify..."

IF YOUR CURRENT ANTIDEPRESSANT ISN'T ENOUGH, IT ISN'T WORKING AND SWITCH TO ONE THAT F@CK!NG WORKS!!!!

But despite all that, HIV is a very real disease, and HAART does work. It's just that Big Pharma makes money hand over fist when they pump that stuff out.

It's like that SouthPark cartoon. "The cure for AIDS....is lots and lots of MONEY!!"

Now, pharmaceuticals are not bad, I have nasty allergies and asthma, and I benefit from a lot of them. It's the business practices that put the profit above all else, above safety, above effectiveness of treatments.

Why does everyone in this thread have dog avatars?

If the whole HIV and AIDS hypothesis were true, how come brilliant top award winning biologists like Peter Duesburg challenges them? He must have a good reason right?