Thus, in order to
"standardize" these results, the officials of the CDC decided to
create guidelines that essentially ignore these inconsistencies. They
stated in one of their publications, "Since 1996, an increased number of
public and private laboratories have begun performing viral load tests.
Results obtained with available test methods are variable, and laboratories
present these results in different ways, indicating that guidelines to promote
standard practice in reporting of test results is warranted."
The problem with this approach is
that since there are inconsistent results, it would seem appropriate to conclude
that there is a problem with the test, rather than simply water down these
disparities by coming up with one way of interpretation and presentaton, when
clearly the test and it's evaluation has no way of consistently providing any
kind of accurate result to go by.
The whole reason for the Viral Load
tests is that the Western Blot had the same problem of inconsistencies.
The Viral Load was supposed to solve the problem with inconsistencies.
Thus what we have today is HIV test
after HIV test that provide no truly standardized results in scientific
definitions, yet we have authorities telling us to interpret these varied
results in a way that ignores these red flags of obvious error.
Summary of Volume 50, No. RR-20 dated
November 16, 2001 of the US Department of Health and Human Services
"Guidelines for Laboratory Test Result Reporting of Human Immunodeficiency
Virus Type 1 Ribonucleic Acid Determination" http://www.phppo.cdc.gov/dls/pdf/mmwr/rr5020.pdf
ref: list of Retroviral/AIDS related
publications by CDC http://www.phppo.cdc.gov/mpep/rpubs.aspx
Topic for class discussion:
Consider that your computer could be infected with one or more retroviruses.
How would you test for it? If you used a software program that tested for
computer retroviruses, and it came up with 19 different statements as to
what was on your computer, how in the world would you be ever be able to know
what to do with those 19 different results? How would you clean your
computer of these retroviruses? What is a retrovirus and how
does it differ from a virus? Is the difference between the two important
and how?
Q: What exactly is HIV?
A: HIV is simply a piece of dead
tissue not unlike numerous other retroviruses that exist in our body at
any given time. It is one thousandth the size of a regular cell, is harmless and
is simply incapable of doing anything that Gallo claims of it.
Retroviruses can't even
reproduce themselves. They need a host cell to reproduce them. If the retrovirus
kills the host cell, as Gallo claims HIV does, then the virus has immediately
committed suicide -- any possible epidemic is over before it began.
T-lymphocytes (our white blood
defensive cells) {6} reproduce 500 times faster than the HIV virus is supposedly
reproduced. This simply means that even if the HIV/AIDS hypothesis were correct
it is impossible for HIV to ever win the battle. It's like saying you are going
to conquer China by giving a noncontagious flu to 3 soldiers a day while their
army increases by 1,500 troops daily.
Retroviruses such as HIV have
been thought to cause many diseases in the past, but extensive, honest
research has proven them basically harmless.
ref.
google search "willner aids"
Got A Viral Load of Non-Sensical Science?
Well, that all depends...upon what
type of so-called "viral load" test your doctor uses. According to
results of one test, you are the healthiest person alive, but according to
results of other tests, watch out! The boogie man ("HIV") is out to
get ya'! Published in a medical journal in 1997 by orthodox "AIDS"
researchers, this chart below should have spelled the END of ALL so-called
"viral load" testing and ANY significance that was artificially
ascribed to these tests. Across the top of this chart are the names of the three
"viral load" tests in use today. Down the left side of the chart is a
list of different so-called "strains" of "HIV". These wide
variations in results also occur even when the SAME test is used repeatedly.
"Viral load" tests, in fact, have MANY problems. For more information,
please read THIS
ARTICLE and THIS
ARTICLE.
