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
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









