AIDS War. Profiteering with PrEP

Abstract _____________________________________________________________________________
America’s AIDS czar for almost 30 years, Dr. Anthony Fauci has promoted and shepherded human experimental research that has exposed HIV negative Third World men and women to toxic chemotherapy, many already health-challenged from lack of clean water, poor sanitation, malnutrition and old diseases like tuberculosis and malaria. The experiments were to demonstrate “Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis” (PrEP) for the anti-viral drug Truvada. Like other nucleoside analogs, Truvada has well-assessed adverse (“side”) effects. Funded with tax dollars and non-profit grants, including tens of millions from Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as well as from the CDC and USAID, studies have accrued to the sole benefit of a politically well- connected U.S. drug corporation, Gilead, the only company to “donate” pills for the clinical trials.
When PrEP was discussed initially in mainstream media, including in a New York Times article published January 22, 2006 (later critically reviewed by independent journalist Liam Scheff), human guinea pigs, almost all impoverished Third World subjects, were already in early phase trials, designed to produce results that would allow Gilead eventually to seek FDA approval for re- purposing its “Viread” but later only its “Truvada” chemotherapy for use by HIV antibody negative Americans, for theoretical protection from a virus proclaimed by the U.S. government in 1984 as a discrete pathogen responsible for the amorphous health condition described since 1982 as “acquired immune deficiency syndrome,” or “AIDS.” Under patent protection until 2021, Truvada remains more profitable for Gilead than Viread, for which a generic can be sold as early as December 2016.
Four main Phase 3 trials were initiated before the FDA approved the only drug studied in all four, Gilead’s Truvada--two with heterosexual Third World women, one with “discordant” (“one negative, one positive”) Third World heterosexual couples, but only one with the original “risk group,”gay men, over 90% of them in the Third World. Two of the heterosexual trials were halted early, when investigators began to see no difference between drugged and placebo cohorts. Reports on the gay male study, iPREX PrEP, and the discordant straight couples trial, Partners PrEP, grossly overstated drug prophylaxis, by using a spurious calculation technique. A valid methodology, dividing sero-conversions in each drug and placebo cohort by cohort size, would have resulted in slight percentage differences between those receiving Truvada and those getting “sugar pills.” [See below full article and summary chart, for a complete explanation.]

Profiteering with PrEP (PreExposure Prophylaxis). Gilead pharmaceutical company's toxic Truvada for so-called HIV

by Terry Michael, September 30, 2014

I trace how a supplemental use for Gilead's HIV chemotherapy went from confirmation-biased clinical trials, funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci, NIH/NIAID director; to approval by the FDA, in a corrupt "user fee" (funded by Gilead) fast-tracked process, just in time for Fauci to announce it at the International AIDS Society "XIX AIDS Conference" in Washington, DC, in July 2012; to the CDC's  compliant  endorsement in May 2014; and now is being touted by a science-uninformed mass media and gay press, heavily promoted by the Gilead public relations machine.

America’s AIDS czar for almost 30 years, Dr. Anthony Fauci has promoted and shepherded human experimental research that has exposed HIV negative Third World men and women to toxic chemotherapy, many already health-challenged from lack of clean water, poor sanitation, malnutrition and old diseases like tuberculosis and malaria. The experiments were to demonstrate “Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis” (PrEP) for the anti-viral drug Truvada. Like other nucleoside analogs, Truvada has well-assessed adverse (“side”) effects. Funded with tax dollars and non-profit grants, including tens of millions from Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as well as from the CDC and USAID, studies have accrued to the sole benefit of a politically well- connected U.S. drug corporation, Gilead, the only company to “donate” pills for the clinical trials. 

When PrEP was discussed initially in mainstream media, including in a New York Times articlepublished January 22, 2006 (later critically reviewed by independent journalist Liam Scheff), human guinea pigs, almost all impoverished Third World subjects, were already in early phase trials, designed to produce results that would allow Gilead eventually to seek FDA approval for re- purposing its “Viread” but later only its “Truvada” chemotherapy for use by HIV antibody negative Americans, for theoretical protection from a virus proclaimed by the U.S. government in 1984 as a discrete pathogen responsible for the amorphous health condition described since 1982 as “acquired immune deficiency syndrome,” or “AIDS.” Under patent protection until 2021, Truvada remains more profitable for Gilead than Viread, for which a generic can be sold as early as December 2016. 

FEAR Over One Man's Death in West Hollywood of Meningitis

FEAR, 1st off who knew that John Duran was a Dr: Read up. (Mayo Clinic on Meningitis)  Before you get more drugs put into your system: FEAR! 
One man died and we run screaming the sky is falling. 
Just like everyone that is DEAD from ACT -UP demanding AZT. 
How about a little bit of history of this man health, etc before we create More FEAR

UPDATE: Great article in the Huffington Post by 

James Peron:

Fear and Misinformation: Meningitis and the LGBT Community

AIDS Healthcare Foundation to offer free

meningitis vaccines starting Monday 

Nick Roman

Beginning Monday, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation will offer meningitis vaccines at three Los Angeles-area locations after the death of a West Hollywood attorney who had recently been exposed to the disease.

Brent Shaad, 33, died at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Saturday evening after his family gave permission to remove him from life support.

Shaad had appeared healthy less than a week ago, according to West Hollywood Councilman John Duran.

On Monday, he began feeling ill, according to an AP report. He went to an emergency room for care on Wednesday, but his condition deteriorated rapidly. He slipped into a coma on Thursday, and doctors declared him brain dead Friday.

Shaad had attended the White Party in Palm Springs the weekend of March 30th and 31st and was a member of the Equinox gym in West Hollywood, and people who may have had contact with him should consider being checked, said Duran.

The free meningitis vaccines are available from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at AHF pharmacies on Santa Monica and Sunset boulevards and the AHF Hollywood Men's Wellness Center on Vermont Avenue, said AIDS Healthcare Foundation president Michael Weinstein.

“While many people, including many gay men, may not have had an exposure or consider themselves at risk, we know that there is a tremendous amount of anxiety out there in the community,” said Weinstein at a news conference Sunday. “We feel that at a minimum, we should offer the vaccine to minimize that anxiety.”

The bacteria that causes meningitis is not as contagious as the common cold, but experts say it can be spread through coughing or kissing. People who contract the illness can suffer from fever, headache, nausea, vomiting, confusion and increased sensitivity to light.

Duran said health officials in the New York area have reported seven deaths from bacterial meningitis this year. He said he understands the fears of some who are afraid that an increase in meningitis outbreak would be labeled as a “gay disease,” as AIDS was in the early 1980s.

But he said the early response then was not strong enough, and that's why a greater response now to meningitis is appropriate.

“What we have learned in our experience with the HIV epidemic is sometimes what happens in New York replicates itself in Los Angeles,” said Duran. “We learned some really painful lessons last time.”

There are two different types of meningitis vaccines: a conjugate vaccine that's given to young people and most adults, and a polysaccharide vaccine for adults older than 55.  The foundation will offer the conjugate vaccine. It requires an initial inoculation, followed by a booster eight weeks later, said Dr. Parveen Kaur, a physician working with the foundation's healthcare centers.

The incubation period for bacterial meningitis is two to seven days, while the vaccine requires about 10 days to provoke an immune response, said Kaur.

Weinstein said the shot costs the foundation $105. It has 10,000 doses available. The foundation will ask for donations or insurance, but it will not turn down anyone who who wants a shot, he said.

The L.A. County Department of Public Health (LACDPH) issued a statement after the AIDS Healthcare Foundation announced its vaccination plans.

In the statement, LACDPH said it had been notified on April 9 of a patient with meningococcal meningitis, and that it has begun an investigation that includes identifying contacts with that person.

At this point in the investigation, Public Health has not identified any other cases of meningococcal meningitis associated with this patient, nor identified any linkage between this patient and outbreaks that have been reported in other areas of the country.

Public Health is working with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to identify the specific strain of the disease from this patient. The specific strain is expected to be identified in the public health laboratory by the end of next week.

The CDC, CDPH and LACDPH do not recommend a vaccination campaign in response to this one single patient with meningococcal meningitis in Los Angeles. Routine vaccination is recommended for children and teens.  Adult vaccination is recommended for persons with specific medical conditions, laboratory workers exposed to the meningococcal bacteria, and travelers to regions of the world with high rates of meningococcal disease.

Black gay men run higher risk of HIV infection despite fewer partners

by Terry Michael

From the same 20th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (Atlanta, March 2013) that gave us the "HIV" baby "cure," we get another attempt to explain-away the exponential difference of "HIV positive" rates between African Americans and Caucasians (7x for black males, 20x for back females, according to the CDC.)

500% disparity between blacks and whites testing "positive" for HIV

If it's a sexually and intravenously transmitted pathogen, there's a word for those 7x and 20x claims, including the "HIV heterosexual pandemic" in Africa, and it's racism.  South Africa's former President Thabo Mbeki recognized the hallucinations of white medicine men about the sexual practices of dark-skinned people. Latter-day "bearers of the white man's burden" exported to deepest, darkest Africa both the "origin of HIV" (transferred to gay white males in Greenwich Village via black-skinned people in Haiti, of course) and the "HIV epidemic" that never occurred in the white heterosexual West.

Baby born with HIV is apparently cured with aggressive drug treatment byDavid Brown at the Washington Post.

To: Dr. David Brown, The Washington Post, re: your story today:
Baby born with HIV is apparently cured with aggressive drug treatment
David,

Some questions you may not have thought to ask:

(1)  What was the race of the mother, treated so aggressively by Caucasian physician Dr. Hannah Gay of Mississippi?
http://www.ummchealth.com/doctors/gay_hannah/ 

(2) And speaking of race, how can it be that African American women are 20x more likely than Caucasian women, according to the CDC,
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/aa/ ...to be "infected" by a purportedly sexually transmitted pathogen? Do they have 20 times as much sex?

(3) What was the informed consent obtained from the mother, for "treatment" of a day-old infant with therapeutic doses of chemotherapy cocktails that have well-assessed, highly toxic adverse effects?

(4) Does it not seem a little odd to you that with 50,000 alleged new "HIV infections" every year in the U.S. fewer than 200 are from mother-to-child transmission, given the claim that this is a blood-borne pathogen?

(5) What is the evidence that 300,000 babies around the world are "infected" with HIV every year from mother-to-child transmission? Fauci uses "one thousand per day." What nice round numbers.  

(6) What were the presenting illnesses--at 30 hours old--of this baby, who was "cured?"  How do you "cure" someone of a retrovirus you don't even know a host has at the time you start administering toxic drugs--which you seem to acknowledge in your story, when you note there's no way to know whether a new-born infant is carrying an active viral pathogen or just its mother's anti-bodies?

This is incredible, even for The HIV-AIDS Industry.  It is just another attempt to line the pockets of drug companies, like Tony Fauci's friends at Gilead Sciences, selling the toxic chemotherapy, sales of which were about $20 billion in 2012, up 250% from just five years before.  And these thousand-dollar-per-month drugs are funded almost entirely by taxpayers.

This "cure" means child-and-family service agencies around the country, already threatening mothers with taking away their babies for refusing "treatment," will have another bullet to hold to the head of those who question drugging a defenseless child.

As always, in your stories, you refuse to quote a single dissenting voice.  Ask Dr. Jay Levy, the "third discoverer of HIV," what he thinks about early drugging.  Ask Dr. Nancy Turner Banks, a Harvard Medical School-educated OBGYN, what she thinks. Ask Dr. Joseph Sonnabend, who treated the first cases of immune deficiency among gay men in New York, what he thinks. (I can supply you with their contact information.)

--Terry Michaels

Abbott Labs 2006 HIV Test Insert

A different story than what you’re told by Bono, Oprah and Barack.

First, the tests have no standard for interpreting their meaning.

• From the paper: “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.”

Translation: They do not predict illness in people who are not already ill, morbidly impoverished, taking Aids drugs or street drugs.

• “The risk of an *asymptomatic [not chronically ill] person with a repeatedly reactive [positive]serum sample developing AIDS or an AIDS-related condition is not known“

The tests have no specific, inherent meaning, but meaning is assigned to persons who are in the CDC’s ‘risk group’ They must be ‘interpreted’ for risk group, and not applied to the general population.

• “Clinical studies continue to clarify and refine the interpretation and medical significance of the presence of antibodies to HIV.”

Note the double-speak – “presence of antibodies.” There is “no standard” for determining the “presence or absence” of antibodies in these tests. The statement above is irrelevant, it has no meaning to this standardless test.

• “AIDS and AIDS-related conditions are clinical syndromes and their diagnosis can only be established clinically. EIA testing [that’s this test] cannot be used to diagnose AIDS, even if the recommended investigation of reactive specimens suggest suggest?] that the antibodies toHIV are present.”

The tests don’t diagnose, the clinician does, based on – not testing positive or negative – but on the CDC’s ‘risk factors,’ like Blackness, poverty, homosexuality.

• “Sensitivity for HIV-1 antibodies was computed based on the clinical diagnosis of Aids.”

The tests are validated, not by matching the results with actual infection with any particular, identifiable particle – the “standard” that is missing, but
by using them on people, pre-supposed to be ‘at risk’ for ‘Aids’, that is, people pre-diagnosed with clinical “Aids.”

The tests don’t give the diagnosis – the clinician does – no testing needed. The tests are said to work if and only if you are in the group that is pre-supposed to be

Washington Post's David Brown says HIV discoverer Luc Montagnier NOT RELEVANT

At "media" panel 7/22/12 organized by AIDS czar Anthony Fauci 

(he funded Swiss advocacy NGO's AIDS Conference in DC, with $7 million in U.S. taxes),

          Terry Michael asked Washington Post's David Brown why he/other journalists refuse to quote 2008 

Nobelist Luc Montagnier, "that body can rid itself of HIV in a few weeks with good immunity". 

Brown disparaged Montagnier as "largely irrelevant for the past 15-20 years." 

Diagnosing HIV without using an HIV Test

Leading experts discuss diagnosing people in the West with HIV, without doing an HIV antibody test.

In Home HIV Tests Now Available to Mislead

Posted by textgenie
HIV Boys Pull Another Fast One With Frightening Easy Test

Chances of False Positive About 1 in 18, or 63,000 People In All

But Even Accurate Tests By Definition Useless and Dangerous

The Times boosted the July 4 celebrations of those leading the biggest scientific scam in history today with a top right front page story by its resident fellow traveler in HIV/AIDS, Donald G. McNeil, entitled Rapid H.I.V. Home Test Wins Federal Approval.

The story bears close examination as a new high point in the HIV promotion crowd’s success in stirring up trouble for which they ask vast funding to deal with.

One interesting aspect is that as stated (after the report was corrected) the tests are quite insensitive to HIV antibodies, so they are somewhat inaccurate in responding to true positives. The 92% accuracy for positives means that 8% of positive results will register negative. It’s 4999 in 5000 accuracy for negatives means (when the arithmetic is added up) that about 5 per cent of the positives it registers will be false. That is, 1 in 20 will be wrong.

What will DC AIDS office be advising physicians on prescribing "anti-retrovirals" to "HIV negatives" for so-called pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)?

Challenging the District of Columbia AIDS bureaucrats on "pre-exposure prophylaxis", or "PrEP"--feeding toxic "anti-retroviral" chemicals to those who have not even tested "positive" on the so-called "HIV test."

On the opening day, Sunday, July 22, of the XIX International AIDS Conference, Terry Michaels questioned the director of the Washington, DC HIV-AIDS bureaucracy about what his agency will be advising physicians on use of ARV's as a prophylaxis against HIV "infection." It was at the end of a panel in which Dr. Robert Gallo participated.  It was the only venue at the 6-day conference to which Gallo was invited. The conference was funded and tightly controlled by NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci, with a $7 million U.S. NIH grant to the Swiss-based advocacy organization that produced the conference.  Millions more U.S. tax dollars were spent on conference registration fees, airfare, hotels and expenses for the mostly university contractors who benefit from Fauci's HIV research grants.

Op-Ed: AIDS, Africa and Duesberg

By Alexander Baron

Oakland - University of California researcher Peter Duesberg has been denounced as a denialist, a crank and worse because of his belief that HIV does not cause AIDS. But what if he is right?

In recent months a number of videos about AIDS have been uploaded to YouTube which support a paradigm that is totally at odds with the official line, namely that AIDS is transmitted sexually, and that the cause of AIDS is the HIV virus. In short, no HIV, no AIDS.

The alternative hypothesis has been around for a long time, and its most high powered proponent is Peter H. Duesberg, Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology in the University of California, Berkeley.

Three years ago, a full length documentary by Brent Leung that explores Duesberg's position in considerable depth was released. House of Numbers: Anatomy of an Epidemic was uploaded to YouTube about 18 months ago. This award winning film also has its own website.

The first thing to note is that Duesberg is not and never has been a lone voice. As another distinguished German scientist, Hans Eysenck, said many years ago, we know so little about any disease.

Since “HIV” doesn’t cause “AIDS”, why were gay men the first victims of AIDS, and why do they so often test “HIV-positive”?

by Henry Bauer 

I started this blog nearly 5 years ago, with the immediate aim of applying to continuing “news” about HIV/AIDS the insights I had gained from collating HIV-test results, namely, that what these tests detect or measure is not an infectious entity, nor is it correlated with the published numbers for “AIDS” (The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory).
Comments from various quarters helped me to learn much more, especially about why gay men have been so much involved; and I was prompted to further analyses of official data, which revealed yet more flaws in HIV/AIDS theory:

•  Since “HIV” doesn’t cause “AIDS”, why were gay men the first victims of AIDS, and why do they so often test “HIV-positive”?
  John Lauritsen  and  Michelle Cochrane (When AIDS Began, 2004 had given good answers to the first point: It was not young, previously healthy, gay men who succumbed to AIDS in the early 1980s, it was predominantly drug-abusing fast-living men in their mid- to late thirties who happened also to be gay.
  Tony Lance answered the second point for me with the intestinal dysbiosis hypothesis, confirmations of which have been coming in increasingly from mainstream sources; see “GRID = Gay Related Intestinal Dysbiosis? Explaining HIV/AIDS Paradoxes in Terms of Intestinal Dysbiosis”    and “What really caused AIDS: Slicing through the Gordian knot”; “AIDS as intestinal dysbiosis”; “Unraveling HIV/AIDS”; “More mainstream alternative treatment for ‘HIV/AIDS’”; “Must read”; “Intestinal Dysbiosis theory confirmed”; “Intestinal dysbiosis theory confirmed again”; “Intestinal dysbiosis: more and more confirmations”.

• I came to realize that the crucial point is that “HIV” tests do not diagnose presence of active HIV virions: “HIV tests are not HIV tests”, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 15 (#1, 2010) 5-9. See also “‘HIV’ tests are self-fulfilling prophecies”; “‘HIV’ tests are demonstrably invalid”; “The Wonderland of ‘HIV’ ‘tests’”; “Health-threatening and life-threatening tests”.
  Etienne de Harven has indicated why “HIV-positive” is misleading: “Human Endogenous Retroviruses and AIDS research: Confusion, consensus, or science?”, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons15#3 (2010) 69-74.

•  Analysis of mortality data shows that “HIV-positive” and “AIDS” are not  diseases, because the mortality of people in those categories does not increase with age whereas mortality from all diseases increases with age, for the obvious reason that our general capacity to resist stress decreases as we age.
  Moreover the supposed latent period between HIV infection and onset of AIDS does not exist: “‘HIV disease’ is not an illness”; “How ‘AIDS Deaths’ and ‘HIV Infections’ vary with age — and why”; “HAART saves lives — but doesn’t prolong them!?”; “Living with HIV; Dying from what?”; “HIV, AIDS, and age: HIV/AIDS theory is wrong”; “Age shall not wither them — because HIV really doesn’t kill”; “No HIV ‘latent period’: dotting i’s and crossing t’s”.

• Many confirmations have appeared from different countries and circumstances of the epidemiological regularities I had found in the largely USA data analyzed in my book, perhaps most strikingly the racial disparities and perhaps most mysteriously the correlation with population density.

• I’ve noted a fine array of absurdities: pregnant women more likely to become “HIV-positive” than non-pregnant women; breast-feeding protective against becoming “HIV-positive” despite being a supposed avenue for transmission of HIV; mainstream activists urging that drug addicts be given fresh clean needles so that they could more safely kill themselves through drug abuse; assertions that HIV is transmitted in different ways in different parts of the world; and more.

As time has passed, fewer and fewer items appeared in the media that were both new and noteworthy and therefore worth blogging about. Microbicide and vaccine trials continue to fail — what more can be said about that except that it confirms over and over again the vacuity of HIV/AIDS theory? Official agencies continue to trumpet the danger of HIV/AIDS even as fewer and fewer people are affected by it — how often is that worth mentioning? Mainstream sources continue to applaud the lifesaving benefits of antiretroviral drugs even as the official Treatment Guidelines and primary literature continue to report the dangerous toxicity of antiretroviral treatment and the continual production of new drugs intended to be less toxic — how often is that worth writing about? And what more can be said about the continuing mis-direction by mainstream sources of labeling as “HIV-associated” ailments that are actually owing to antiretroviral drugs: lipodystrophy, kidney failure, heart failure, and much more (in addition to the re-labeling in Africa of well known diseases as “AIDS”: tuberculosis, malaria, and more).
So after a few years of blogging here, media coverage of HIV/AIDS has become for me déjà vu all over again

“On the Front Lines of the AIDS Pandemic” by Harry Haverkos

by David Crowe


Harry Haverkos is an enigma for HIV and AIDS rethinkers. A product of the US medical establishment he pursued the theory that one of the two major AIDS indicator disease known as Kaposi’s Sarcoma [KS] (the other was Pneumocystis carinii Pneumonia, or PCP) was caused by the practice of many gay men to inhale amyl nitrite ‘Poppers’. Yet, even so, Haverkos always gave allegiance to the infectious HIV=AIDS=Death dogma. His new book, “On the Front Lines of the AIDS Pandemic” describes just how deeply he was embedded within the AIDS establishment even before the AIDS era officially began, in the years 1980 to 1984, while at the CDC (US Centers for Disease Control).

Scientists see AIDS vaccine within reach after decades

MORE FALSE HOPE?

CHICAGO (Reuters *don't post a comment that Reuter's doesn't like, you will be banned) - At an ill-fated press conference in 1984, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler boldly predicted an effective AIDS vaccine would be available within just two years.

But a string of failed attempts - punctuated by a 2007 trial in which a Merck vaccine appeared to make people more vulnerable to infection, not less - cast a shadow over AIDS vaccine research that has taken years to dispel.

Predictability of a CD4 Count

Predictability of a CD4 Count

David Crowe

When an AIDS doctor declares that a patient with a CD4 count is “severely immunesuppressed”

he is making a prediction based on the CD4 count with near certainty. When

a doctor proclaims that an HIV positive person’s CD4 count of 200 or 350 or 500 shows

that it is “time to start drugs” they are also making a prediction on the basis of a CD4

count, a prediction with implied certainty. Perhaps, if pressed, the doctor might admit that

there are some people with low CD4 counts who are not sick, but the basic message is

that CD4 counts have been shown, scientifically, to be highly accurate indicators of your

stage of “progression to AIDS” – from asymptomatic to pre-AIDS (“AIDS-related

complex”) to full-blown AIDS and then death.

But, what is the evidence that CD4 counts are associated with stage of immune

suppression? And, how accurate would a prediction that a certain CD4 count indicates

that a person is at a particular stage of HIV or AIDS be?

John P.Moore, Aids Denialist

by Liam Scheff

John P. Moore, of the New York Times, and of Aidstruth.org, on his approach to discourse and debate in science [Here ]:

• “AIDS Truth’s approach is to destroy (by public exposure) the “leadership” of the AIDS denialist movement and thereby prevent them from causing the deaths of people who for various reasons are prone to believing the lies the denialists peddle for political reasons, including the profit motive.”

First, there is no “Aids denialist movement.” This is a term Moore has invented to describe those have pointed to the massive, blood-soaked failures of the standard Aids belief system, and pleaded for a new plan of attack on the many problems that “Aids” represents and stands in for.

Second, the profit motive belongs, solely, to the mainstream. Nobody is getting rich by asking GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, or Bristol-Myers-Squibb to stop poisoning poor, Black children with their very profitable, internationally distributed and hawked drugs.

D.C. hopes to test 35,000 employees for HIV over 3 months

By Marissa Evans -  

The District’s departments of Health and Human Resources, along with union leaders, kicked off a campaign Wednesday with the goal of testing 35,000 city employees over the next three months. During that period, city employees who decide to get tested will first receive instructions on how to prevent infection. READ the whole article: washingtonpost.com

What they don't tell people is:

What you can expect

By Mayo Clinic staff

HIV is usually diagnosed by testing your blood or a sample of cells taken with a cotton swab from inside your cheek for the presence of antibodies to the virus. Urine samples can also be tested for HIV antibodies, but the results are slightly less accurate.

Unfortunately, these HIV tests aren't accurate immediately after infection because it takes time for your body to produce antibodies to the virus. Most people develop antibodies to the HIV virus within three to six months of infection.

If this test is positive — meaning you have antibodies to HIV — lab technicians run the same test again on the sample you provided. If the repeat test is also positive for HIV antibodies, you need a confirming blood test called the Western blot test, which checks for the presence of HIV proteins.

YAY, Walgreens out to Sell more AIDS Drugs!!!

Walgreens and Greater Than AIDS Team Up With Health Departments and Local AIDS Service Organizations to Provide Free HIV Testing in Support of National HIV Testing Day


HIV Testing Events at Select Walgreens Locations in 20 Cities Between June 27-29, from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. Daily