Reply to HT Cotter on HIV/AIDS
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 4:48 am
Here is my reply to HT Cotter's rebuttal:
I did not intend my email to be haughty on such a serious topic as HIV/AIDS, I'm sorry you took it that way. My statements are not axiomatic but can be backed by facts and have nothing to do with Homeopathy, but only for Practitioners thinking that they have a magic bullet for HIV.
1. "...you embarrass yourself with this nonsense ("....there is no HIV virus or retrovirus.")."
Response: This is a fact; there is no HIV virus or retrovirus. There is overwhelming evidence that there is no HIV. I know the truth, it's an embarrassment for the Practitioners that do not.
2. "Such claims can be wrongly associated with homeopathy and taint the holistic health movement."
Response: please explain how the claim "that there is no HIV virus" which is made by Holistic Health Organizations in contrast to the Allopathic medical model, taint the alternative health movement? And how can it be wrongly associated with Homeopathy?
3. "Harvey Bialy is not a MD. Nor is he a "leading virologist."
Response: Many websites list the title MD after Bialy's name. It is possible that he has earned or has been honored with that degree, in addition to his PhD degree. Bialy was among the top Scientists invited to be on the panel of the So African conference on AIDS, as was Helene Gayle MD, & Professor Peter Duesberg, in March 2001. Most of the scientific community consider him to be tops in his field. (Bialy is a molecular biologist, my error.)
4. "I for one, would like to see Dr. Helena Gayle's statement that AIDS is not caused by HIV retrovirus. Can you supply the source of that quotation?"
Response: Dr Gayle gave a speech at the above conference, in which she stated; "...we have as yet to find the HIV virus...". Part of her speech was published in the Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients about 1-1/2 to 2 years ago. It should be easy to find at this publication or a Google search.
5."They hardly need be chastised or 'awakened' by these second-hand assertions."
Response: I did not intend to chasten anyone, but yes, awaken those Practitioners who still believe in the Allopathic medical model of HIV=AIDS.
6."The people to whom you're making these first order statements are representative and emblematic of those who are curing patients with this disease."
Response: AIDS is not a disease, either chronic or acute. The name refers to a deficient immune system. Johns Hopkins Medical states that AIDS is about 24 different disease conditions as defined in the US and Western Europe, by the CDC.
Many scientists state that, HIV is not the cause of AIDS because it fails to meet the golden rules of Koch & Henley postulates, as well as the six rules of virology. Even the tests for HIV are extremely inaccurate, that is why a "squeaky clean person" can test HIV+ with a cold, or pregnancy. Even an emotional trauma can suppress the immune system of a person and they can test HIV+ at that time.
Also doubtful, Dr. Luc Montagnier, Virologist, co-discoverer of HIV, Institute of Pasteur, Paris, Fr, stated in the Miami Herald, Dec 23, 1999, “There are too many shortcomings in the theory that HIV causes all signs of AIDS”.
Furthermore, while HIV has been correlated with AIDS, there have been many cases of people with AIDS diseases with no evidence of HIV, noted Dr. Charles Thomas, Jr. of the Helicon Foundation, a not-for-profit AIDS organization.
While HIV is reported to be rampant in Africa, its citizens are not dying at high rates from AIDS. Charles Geshekter, PhD. a professor specializing in African studies has taken 12 research trips to Africa and has organized a conference on “Rethinking AIDS”. Professor Geshekter says that AIDS in Africa is a different set of diseases than it is in North America and Western Europe.
How is it possible for a virus to only attack the poor in Africa and not the middle or upper classes?
The definition of AIDS in Africa was agreed to at a WHO conference convened in Central African Republic in late 1985. This definition itself is decisively different than the definitions of an AIDS case in North America or Western Europe. That definition is based on 4 clinical symptoms, which are very widespread and very common throughout Africa. They are: a persistent dry cough, a high fever, loose stools or diarrhea for 30 days, and a 10% loss of body weight over a two-month period.
To compare, AIDS in North America and Western Europe, is characterized by such things as severe immuno-suppression and characteristic opportunistic infections like Kaposi’s sarcoma and candidiasis, whereas African AIDS is associated with other symptoms like wasting disease. In Africa they have always had wasting disease and malaria. A virus should cause the same disease, and in Africa it clearly doesn’t. They’ve just taken all the old diseases, combined with HIV, and called it AIDS. But a lot of people in Africa just have the same diseases they’ve always had.
7. "However, I have yet to find any patient whose body makes antibodies to HIV without exposure to HIV."
AIDS is politically, not medically, defined. There were people who felt that a single-virus theory would be very useful in helping to raise public awareness about the 'disease.' It would help them get the research they thought was necessary and public funding for its treatment by scaring people into believing that while the disease was affecting gay men now, it was eventually going to spread throughout the heterosexual population. This political definition of the disease has proven to be inaccurate and inconsistent with its real medical nature." States Steven Jonas, professor of preventative medicine U/NY at Stony Brook.
“The first rule is that an agent that's going to be blamed for a disease should be able to be isolated from each and every case of the disease," says Dr. Cunningham. "That is not true with HIV and AIDS. It's very, very difficult, in many cases of AIDS, to isolate the virus at all from these individuals. The second step is that you should be able to transmit the agent that is [causing] the infectious disease to another animal and have the disease develop in that animal. To the best of my knowledge, that has never been done with the agent we call HIV. The final step, of course, is to remove the agent from the animal which has been infected, put it into another animal, and transmit the disease in this fashion. This, too, has not occurred with HIV”, states Dr. Roger Cunningham, an immunologist, microbiologist, and the director of the Ernst Witsky Center for Immunology at the School of Medicine at the State University of New York at Buffalo.
I also refer you to an article in Continuum Magazine Vol 5 No.3, by A. Hassig, MD, H. Kremer MD, S Lanka PhD, W. X Liang MD, & K Stamphfli, MD, the summary states that the evidence for the existence of HIV retroviruses was wrong.
Regards,
Bill G.
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Sir,
I write this rebuttal to your open letter to Minutus (follows) with some reluctance, since our kind tend to have the least respect for each other’s contrary opinion. However, when such supercilious statements are blatantly suggested to be axiomatic and might be attributed to homeopathy, then a retort is required.
While you might be commented for your zeal, you embarrass yourself with this nonsense ("....there is no HIV virus or retrovirus."). Such claims can be wrongly associated with homeopathy and taint the holistic health movement. Harvey Bialy is not a MD. Nor is he a "leading virologist." I have been developing treatment protocols for this illness since it was called "Slims." Certainly, many AIDS patients have been cured by holistic protocols, as I have cured many in my practice. The people to whom you're making these first order statements are representative and emblematic of those who are curing patients with this disease. They hardly need be chastised or 'awakened' by these second-hand assertions. Most diseases are the sum of the forces that lead the patient into that state from health. However, I have yet to find any patient whose body makes antibodies to HIV without exposure to HIV.
If you have done any original work for which you can speak with authority, then certainly you deserve a listen. I for one, would like to see Dr. Helena Gayle's statement that AIDS is not caused by HIV retrovirus. Can you supply the source of that quotation?
Sincerely,
Dr. H. Thomas Cotter
Author "Homeopathy in the Curing of AIDS" (1984)
I did not intend my email to be haughty on such a serious topic as HIV/AIDS, I'm sorry you took it that way. My statements are not axiomatic but can be backed by facts and have nothing to do with Homeopathy, but only for Practitioners thinking that they have a magic bullet for HIV.
1. "...you embarrass yourself with this nonsense ("....there is no HIV virus or retrovirus.")."
Response: This is a fact; there is no HIV virus or retrovirus. There is overwhelming evidence that there is no HIV. I know the truth, it's an embarrassment for the Practitioners that do not.
2. "Such claims can be wrongly associated with homeopathy and taint the holistic health movement."
Response: please explain how the claim "that there is no HIV virus" which is made by Holistic Health Organizations in contrast to the Allopathic medical model, taint the alternative health movement? And how can it be wrongly associated with Homeopathy?
3. "Harvey Bialy is not a MD. Nor is he a "leading virologist."
Response: Many websites list the title MD after Bialy's name. It is possible that he has earned or has been honored with that degree, in addition to his PhD degree. Bialy was among the top Scientists invited to be on the panel of the So African conference on AIDS, as was Helene Gayle MD, & Professor Peter Duesberg, in March 2001. Most of the scientific community consider him to be tops in his field. (Bialy is a molecular biologist, my error.)
4. "I for one, would like to see Dr. Helena Gayle's statement that AIDS is not caused by HIV retrovirus. Can you supply the source of that quotation?"
Response: Dr Gayle gave a speech at the above conference, in which she stated; "...we have as yet to find the HIV virus...". Part of her speech was published in the Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients about 1-1/2 to 2 years ago. It should be easy to find at this publication or a Google search.
5."They hardly need be chastised or 'awakened' by these second-hand assertions."
Response: I did not intend to chasten anyone, but yes, awaken those Practitioners who still believe in the Allopathic medical model of HIV=AIDS.
6."The people to whom you're making these first order statements are representative and emblematic of those who are curing patients with this disease."
Response: AIDS is not a disease, either chronic or acute. The name refers to a deficient immune system. Johns Hopkins Medical states that AIDS is about 24 different disease conditions as defined in the US and Western Europe, by the CDC.
Many scientists state that, HIV is not the cause of AIDS because it fails to meet the golden rules of Koch & Henley postulates, as well as the six rules of virology. Even the tests for HIV are extremely inaccurate, that is why a "squeaky clean person" can test HIV+ with a cold, or pregnancy. Even an emotional trauma can suppress the immune system of a person and they can test HIV+ at that time.
Also doubtful, Dr. Luc Montagnier, Virologist, co-discoverer of HIV, Institute of Pasteur, Paris, Fr, stated in the Miami Herald, Dec 23, 1999, “There are too many shortcomings in the theory that HIV causes all signs of AIDS”.
Furthermore, while HIV has been correlated with AIDS, there have been many cases of people with AIDS diseases with no evidence of HIV, noted Dr. Charles Thomas, Jr. of the Helicon Foundation, a not-for-profit AIDS organization.
While HIV is reported to be rampant in Africa, its citizens are not dying at high rates from AIDS. Charles Geshekter, PhD. a professor specializing in African studies has taken 12 research trips to Africa and has organized a conference on “Rethinking AIDS”. Professor Geshekter says that AIDS in Africa is a different set of diseases than it is in North America and Western Europe.
How is it possible for a virus to only attack the poor in Africa and not the middle or upper classes?
The definition of AIDS in Africa was agreed to at a WHO conference convened in Central African Republic in late 1985. This definition itself is decisively different than the definitions of an AIDS case in North America or Western Europe. That definition is based on 4 clinical symptoms, which are very widespread and very common throughout Africa. They are: a persistent dry cough, a high fever, loose stools or diarrhea for 30 days, and a 10% loss of body weight over a two-month period.
To compare, AIDS in North America and Western Europe, is characterized by such things as severe immuno-suppression and characteristic opportunistic infections like Kaposi’s sarcoma and candidiasis, whereas African AIDS is associated with other symptoms like wasting disease. In Africa they have always had wasting disease and malaria. A virus should cause the same disease, and in Africa it clearly doesn’t. They’ve just taken all the old diseases, combined with HIV, and called it AIDS. But a lot of people in Africa just have the same diseases they’ve always had.
7. "However, I have yet to find any patient whose body makes antibodies to HIV without exposure to HIV."
AIDS is politically, not medically, defined. There were people who felt that a single-virus theory would be very useful in helping to raise public awareness about the 'disease.' It would help them get the research they thought was necessary and public funding for its treatment by scaring people into believing that while the disease was affecting gay men now, it was eventually going to spread throughout the heterosexual population. This political definition of the disease has proven to be inaccurate and inconsistent with its real medical nature." States Steven Jonas, professor of preventative medicine U/NY at Stony Brook.
“The first rule is that an agent that's going to be blamed for a disease should be able to be isolated from each and every case of the disease," says Dr. Cunningham. "That is not true with HIV and AIDS. It's very, very difficult, in many cases of AIDS, to isolate the virus at all from these individuals. The second step is that you should be able to transmit the agent that is [causing] the infectious disease to another animal and have the disease develop in that animal. To the best of my knowledge, that has never been done with the agent we call HIV. The final step, of course, is to remove the agent from the animal which has been infected, put it into another animal, and transmit the disease in this fashion. This, too, has not occurred with HIV”, states Dr. Roger Cunningham, an immunologist, microbiologist, and the director of the Ernst Witsky Center for Immunology at the School of Medicine at the State University of New York at Buffalo.
I also refer you to an article in Continuum Magazine Vol 5 No.3, by A. Hassig, MD, H. Kremer MD, S Lanka PhD, W. X Liang MD, & K Stamphfli, MD, the summary states that the evidence for the existence of HIV retroviruses was wrong.
Regards,
Bill G.
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Sir,
I write this rebuttal to your open letter to Minutus (follows) with some reluctance, since our kind tend to have the least respect for each other’s contrary opinion. However, when such supercilious statements are blatantly suggested to be axiomatic and might be attributed to homeopathy, then a retort is required.
While you might be commented for your zeal, you embarrass yourself with this nonsense ("....there is no HIV virus or retrovirus."). Such claims can be wrongly associated with homeopathy and taint the holistic health movement. Harvey Bialy is not a MD. Nor is he a "leading virologist." I have been developing treatment protocols for this illness since it was called "Slims." Certainly, many AIDS patients have been cured by holistic protocols, as I have cured many in my practice. The people to whom you're making these first order statements are representative and emblematic of those who are curing patients with this disease. They hardly need be chastised or 'awakened' by these second-hand assertions. Most diseases are the sum of the forces that lead the patient into that state from health. However, I have yet to find any patient whose body makes antibodies to HIV without exposure to HIV.
If you have done any original work for which you can speak with authority, then certainly you deserve a listen. I for one, would like to see Dr. Helena Gayle's statement that AIDS is not caused by HIV retrovirus. Can you supply the source of that quotation?
Sincerely,
Dr. H. Thomas Cotter
Author "Homeopathy in the Curing of AIDS" (1984)