Friday, August 29, 2008

The following website has been reposting articles from The Reiki Matrix,
so obviously they are a great website and they must know what they are
doing :-) , therefore I'm plugging them here: has been found by group of individuals who is interested
in spreading the importance and curing nature of Reiki energy among the
common people. We do not conduct Reiki Training program nor healing
session. We are not registered with any Reiki Organization also we are
not certified as a Reiki Master. The published contents on is for information and knowledge purpose only. For any
treatment or practice we request you consult near by Reiki Master for
better result.


How we managed to overcome HIV and AIDS

I need your help

I need your help for a book that I am writing, which is tentatively entitled:

How we managed to overcome HIV and AIDS
without the use of toxic antiretrovirals

If you are a person diagnosed as seropositive (HIV-positive) and live a normal life without taking antiretrovirals, you can help me with a book that I am writing, a book that will feature the testimonies of those who have survived this diagnosis. This book will be in support of and will be of great help to those who suffer the social Calvary of seropositivity and AIDS. History will recognize the courage and bravery of each witness and your testimony will support and bring hope to those affected, demonstrating that it is possible to escape the incorrect forecasts of the official view on AIDS.

I am asking each person or affected family to write a testimony of his/her own history as follows:

  1. Each person or family will write a detailed history describing the ordeal suffered because of seropositivity, including how he/she learned of the existence of the AIDS Dissident Movement, and what he/she does to stay healthy. In addition, I will request a detailed history of the life of each seropositive, beginning (as much as possible) when he/she was in the womb, in order to ascertain which immunological stressor agents the person might have been exposed to, as well as to know the kind of person that he/she is. Please describe your joys and sorrows, the hopes and frustrations of a lifetime.

  2. The history should be from 5 to 20 pages and written in the individual's personal style. The words should come from the heart. Each testimony will be a chapter of the book and the book will contain as many styles as there are testimonies.

  3. You can sign your testimony with your name and address or use a pseudonym if you prefer. However, I, as editor of the book, will need complete identification of the person, with permission to publish his/her history in this book. I will publish only what the individual authorizes.

  4. When you have finished writing your testimony, please send it to my email address, I will proof read it and, if necessary, return it for corrections.

  5. Initially, the book will be published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese.

  6. I am currently reviewing several testimonies from different countries, and there is no doubt that this book will be a very powerful weapon. These testimonies are far stronger than scientific arguments.

  7. Please forward this information to other seropositive people who do not take antiretrovirals.

Thank you very much,

Roberto Giraldo, MD


  Home     Mail     Links     Articles     Reports     Correspondence     Español  

Wednesday, August 27, 2008


In early June, 2008, Dr. Kevin DeCock, the head of the World Health Organization HIV/AIDS department admitted that the threat of a global heterosexual AIDS pandemic is over!  That burst the bubble on decades of dire predictions.   So, how deep do the AIDS lies go?  Fintan Dunne rips through the hype to the scientific facts, as the greatest medical scam of all time begins to collapse.

Saturday, August 23, 2008

The Mind-Body Connection by Cathy Sherman: Parts 1 & 2

The Mind-Body Connection: Fear Manifests in Many Diseases (Part 1)

(NaturalNews) The wheelchair bound patient was sure she had Parkinson’s Disease, but by the end of one session, she was jogging down the hall. A man dies of cancer, yet the autopsy showed there were not enough cancerous spots in his body to have killed him. A priest administers the last rites to the wrong patient, and that patient dies unexpectedly.

These patients all had different diagnoses, yet they were all affected by the same cause. It has been proven that fear can cause disease, and even death. Though this idea is not new, our understanding of it is progressing because of new technologies that give us a window into the brain.

The underlying ancient concept, formalized decades ago by Dr. Robert K. Merton, can be found in Greek mythological stories and elsewhere. Merton further refined its definition and named it the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. According to this construct, once a prophecy or fact is predicted, events are set in motion that work together to bring it to pass. These events can occur within a person’s psyche or develop as part of the situation from which the prophetic statement sprang.

The most recent refinement of this concept has been made by the alternative branch of medicine. Specifically, the practitioners and advocates of mind-body studies have conducted research which goes far beyond the placebo effect. It has been accepted by many that if a patient believes they are receiving medicine, its expected effects will actually take place in their bodies, even if their medicine is nothing more than sugar made to look like a pill.

The field of hypnosis is one area in which this power of suggestion is taken further. Brain scan technology has shown that the same area of the brain becomes activated during an actual experience and during an imagining of that experience. It can be documented that if a person is told under hypnosis that a red-hot iron is touching their skin, the person’s body somehow produces a blister on their skin, even if the iron was not hot at all.

Medical doctors will admit that a large percentage of illness is caused by stress. Stress derails the work of cytokines, the agents of the immune system that respond to a wound site. The derailment causes these cells to overreact and create an inflammatory response that is over the top, often creating a greater disorder than the original wound.

Since 1961, the term “nocebo phenomenon” has been identified. According to this reverse placebo effect, a patient will become sick or sicker after being told of negative side effects, or on being informed of specifics about an illness just diagnosed.

Research has demonstrated this effect. In one experiment, 66% of the volunteers complained of headaches after being told an electric current was applied to their heads. In actuality, no current was really applied. In another study, women holding the belief that they were prone to heart disease died at four times the rate of those who didn’t hold such a belief, even though they all started out with the same risk factors.

However, now we know that stress is not always involved in the development of a mind-body illness. In the Parkinson’s case previously mentioned, the patient was misdiagnosed with Parkinson’s after falling and developing an inability to walk, which wasn’t related to her injuries. After being convinced by another physician that the problem was in her head, not her legs, she was able to get out of the wheelchair and walk with help, then even jog with no other assistance than a handrail.

Many researchers have studied the fear of aging and documented that those who believe their memories will soon fail actually undergo memory problems sooner than others in similar condition, but minus the belief. In cultures which value the aged, mental ability does not deteriorate until much later, if at all, than in societies where people are defined as elderly at age 65. If people live in an environment which views aging as disease, such as that of an assisted living facility, they will age faster than those who live in a mixed-age community where they are not expected to act differently just because they are over 65.

The most exciting news about the mind-over-matter phenomenon comes from a cell biologist who has evidence documenting just what biochemical mechanisms facilitate it. Bruce H. Lipton, PhD, challenges the traditional cell theories which basically define cells as inflexible, created to do only one job or job type. Instead, he considers them as robotic, like computer chips in a computer, in that they can be reprogrammed to take on different jobs.

Cells are built to act on their own, and they can even live independently, in a laboratory environment. But in a community environment, once it becomes integrated, the cell’s individuality becomes subjugated. The community as a whole receives operating messages from the life force, not the individual cell.

The cell director, the power behind the reprogramming -- the life force -- is the person. It is the information-receiving process, as messages are sent to the cell for action, that determines the cell’s behavior, not some built-in, fixed programming. Simply stated, there is no cancer gene; illness is not inherited. Rather, cells become cancerous because they were told to do so. Fear is often the operative that drives such instruction.

For example, doctors today push all the new diagnostic toys they possess and encourage patients to have mammograms, colonoscopies, etc., with the explanation “we tell everyone of this age to get one, because such and such a percent of people this age will get” cancer, polyps etc. Combined with this are the incessant magazine and TV ads for pharmaceuticals purporting to treat the various maladies.

Such seeds sow fear in people’s minds, consciously or subconsciously. Where previously the person hadn’t even considered the possibility of colon cancer, now he or she starts worrying about it. Every little abdominal pain feeds the worry. Lipton says that the current high rates of colon and rectal cancers are linked with the amount of information in the media that there is a high rate of colon and rectal cancers.

Evidence for the above process goes back to studies done in the 1920’s. Dr. Walter Cannon, a Harvard University professor, coined the term "homeostasis" to describe the organism’s need for mental and physical balance throughout the organism. His research resulted in the acceptance of the “fight or flight response.”

Hans Selye added to Cannon’s discoveries by studying animals, finding that under different mental and physical stresses, their bodies adapted and returned to a situation of healing and recovery. During the adaptation process, Selye discovered that the thymus and other major organs of the immune system actually shrank. If the environmental stresses continued, the immune system did not recover and the animal became overwhelmed and died.

More recent research by Candice Pert, a neuropharmacologist, explained the workings of neuropeptides, the chemical messengers that are essential to the mind-body relationship. She found them on both the brain’s cell walls and on those of the immune system. Their presence in both demonstrates their close relationship, which means the brain and emotions are closely related to the immune system as messages are transmitted back and forth.

Pert also showed how the endocrine system with its hormones plays a part. Simply put, as long as it is all balanced, health is maintained. But, as Cannon showed, once a stressor causes an emotional imbalance, the immune system suffers and disease can overcome it.

According to Matthew J. Loop, DC, an advocate for the Law of Attraction, there is another explanation. The negative side of the usually positive Law of Attraction is explained by the concept of acidity/alkalinity. An alkaline condition in the body is considered more healthful. Negative thoughts and stressfulness cause the balance to tip to acidity. Therefore, illness often happens.

Remember the lady in the wheelchair? She demonstrates that there is good news: the mind-body relationship can also work in a positive direction. A future article will discuss such ways brain chemistry can be changed to bring healing in body and mind.


Desonta Holder, “Does the Fear of Dying Become a Self-fulfilling Prophecy for People?”; Oakland Tribune, Nov 12, 2007

University of Rochester Medical Center (2005, October 10). “I Think, Therefore I Fall”. ScienceDaily, ((

Jere Daniel, “Learning to Love Growing Old - Fear of aging speeds the very decline we dread most”. Psychology Today, Sep/Oct 94.

“Cell Consciousness – Proves Mind Over Matter”, ((
Jay Quinlan, ((

Matthew J. Loop, DC, “The Secret Law of Attraction Makes you Healthy and Rich”. Posted on March 7, 2008 on (

Buzz up!vote nowBoost this article on YahooBuzz! Click "BuzzUp!"

The Mind-Body Connection: Our Thoughts Can Heal Us (PT 2)

(NaturalNews) The "new biology" is challenging many long-held beliefs that affect us in the areas of psychology, physiology, and spirituality. As the quote below indicates, mind-over-matter was an idea advocated by Kabbalists of the 18th century, but it came to be regarded as a fantasy, a theory that received very negative reviews in "modern" times. Once DNA was discovered, genetic paradigms gained influence over every phase of our lives. When a large number of illnesses and disorders were blamed on genes inherited from parents, it provided an excuse for our distress.

"The basic cause of illness is unhappiness; therefore the great healer is joy."(Rabbi Nachman, late 18th century)

There was a time recently when many doctors would imply to their patients that their illness was all in their heads. Patients did not like this, as it put the responsibility for maintaining health on the person's own shoulders. Many thought their doctor said this only because he or she could not figure out the source of symptoms. Now, however, science is making strides in brain studies which are providing proof that our thoughts can indeed affect our brain chemistry and thus our physical and mental health.

We have learned that negative emotions such as fear and stress not only make our bodies more susceptible to disease, but can actually cause the disease. Conversely, the same biochemical mechanisms that work against us may also be utilized to work for us.

The placebo effect has been shown to heal a fair percentage of patients whose belief in the cure was enough to actually rid their bodies of disease. This effect works by the power of suggestion; patients have believed they had surgeries for cancer when they have not had any and the cancer cleared up, or they have been given sugar pills that cured them.

The new biology takes this further. It is not just the power of suggestion, but the actual thoughts and words chosen by the person which changes brain chemistry. We have 50 trillion cells in our body which communicate through neurochemical and vibration signals. Bruce H. Lipton, PhD, has done a large amount of work in this field, which is called epigenetics.

The word epigenetics literally means "above the genes", i.e., the mind controls the genes. Dr. Lipton says our minds can re-write our genes. He compares the cell to a computer chip, as each is a bit of information. Both can receive information through different routes and cause a reaction.

Epigenetics changes our paradigm of control. The old physics believed the universe is based on matter. The new biology is based on the idea that the universe is governed by energy.

Even though the programming of the cells begins in infancy or before birth, they can be reprogrammed to act differently. The process which the information goes through to affect the cell determines the programming of the cell. Cells become cancerous because they are instructed in some way to do so. If we realize this and change our beliefs, thus changing our messages to our cells, Lipton says we can heal ourselves.

With genes off the hook as the cause of cancer, for example, people won't have the negative worries and thoughts about cancer that plague them just because their mom, dad or other relative had it. This in itself should eliminate a large number of incidences of cancer.

However, this is still not all of the power of the new biology. The main chemicals which play a role in our brain chemistry are Dopamine, Serotonin, Norepinephrine and Endorphins. Each of these affects a different area. Most recreational runners know the endorphin effect, or runner's high. Messages sent to the brain tell it to produce more or less of a certain chemical, depending on what the body needs at the time.

These messages can be stimulated by bodily processes which tell our mind what we need, or mental processes by which our thoughts originate the signaling message.

It is the thought-as-originator concept which is harder for people to understand. Consider these examples:

* We know how easily our emotions, and resulting chemical changes, can be manipulated by visuals from TV or movies;

* Even reading a suspenseful novel will elicit changes in our brain chemistry;

* Consider how a coach gets adrenalin pumping in his football players before taking the field.

If we subject ourselves to a heavy menu of negative stimuli, we will probably suffer from stress-induced illness. When the mind is stressed, the level of immune protective cells goes down. The opposite is also true: when the emotional state is relaxed, the number of protective cells goes up. So if a person practices meditation, positive thinking and other methods to create a relaxed mood, immunity against disease improves.

Tipping the scales toward peaceful relaxed moods should keep the chemistry in balance and ensure a more healthful physical environment for cells.

These positive mental practices help to change confidence levels -- by first changing chemical levels.
Repeating the same words over and over can create new paths between chemicals. Once the new paths are
created, new thought patterns become habitual. For example, to provide more will power, a person can change "I will never lose this weight." to "I can lose weight."

Since the 1960's, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), a form of psychotherapy, has developed based on the premise that thoughts can change behavior and overwrite the cell's memory. Learning new rational, self-counseling skills are the focus of the client, under the teaching of the therapist. This type of counseling can achieve results quite quickly, but it is necessary that the client be able to articulate his thoughts and feelings and be willing to change them.

Comparisons have been studied by mapping brain activity in patients taking antidepressants and in patients undergoing the CBT. With CBT, brain changes occurred in later-evolving regions of the brain, those that deal with cognition, memory, and planning, such as the hippocampus and frontal cortices.

The pharmacological treatment appeared to alter the brain regions associated with the basic functions of breathing and gross motor control, such as the brainstem and cerebellum. So it appears that similarly felt changes in behavior and mood are caused by the different mechanisms of drugs and therapy without drugs.

It is a great advance that we now have this information, which was not known by science in the 18th century. Yet the techniques of meditation and visualization to improve healing were being taught. Meditation, the conscious control and direction of one's thoughts, has been shown to be effective in many diseases. Avraham Greenbaum states in his book, The Wings of the Sun:

"A number of studies have indicated that regular meditation can reduce hypertension (high blood pressure), which is implicated in the vast majority of heart attacks and strokes, and that it can also lower abnormally high levels of cholesterol in the blood...

"Other studies indicate that regular meditation may substantially increase blood levels of certain important immune-system hormones, while reducing levels of the stress hormones that have been linked to many diseases. In addition, meditation is said to be of benefit for migraine, various kinds of back pain, digestive disorders, arthritis, diabetes and thyroid problems."

In visualization, the patient vividly imagines the outcome he or she wishes to achieve, such as the white blood cells swallowing up the attacking bacteria or virus cells. It is believed that the imagination actually influences the physiological processes, some of which include salivation, muscle tension, respiration, heart rate, blood pressure, gastrointestinal activity, blood glucose levels and blister formation.

Rabbi Nachman emphasized "Thought can bring about many things... When thought is intensely concentrated it can exert great influence. Every faculty of the mind, both conscious and unconscious, down to the innermost point, must be focused without distraction. To accomplish this, the concentrated thought must spell out every step of the desired result in detail."

He even described how a patient could speak to his body parts to affect change. According to Greenbaum, "There is indeed evidence that for certain types of physical conditions, sounds or vibrations of various kinds can be used to promote healing. Sounds, chants, prayers and music play a role in many healing traditions. Sound waves may well have a direct effect on certain aspects of bodily functioning."

The human body is a wonderful thing, and now we know that the mind is even more incredible! What mystics knew two hundred years ago, we now know evidentially: the mind has the power to bring mental, emotional and physical healing. Changing thought patterns is not always easy –- in fact, it can be excruciatingly hard. But if one is able and determined to improve his or her health, methods are now close at hand that are free without nasty side effects. Upgrade thought –- upgrade health!


( Wings of the Sun , online version







Buzz up!vote nowBoost this article on YahooBuzz! Click "BuzzUp!"

The Plot to Starve and Destroy the Health of Americans Continues

FDA Unleashes Mass Irradiation of Spinach, Lettuce and Other Vegetables

(NaturalNews) The FDA has announced that beginning today, spinach and lettuce sold across the United States may now be secretly irradiated before it reaches grocery store shelves. What's "secret" about it? The FDA previously decided that irradiation warning stickers would not be required on any food items because it would be "too confusing to consumers." (The word IRRADIATION apparently has too many letters to be understood to food buyers.) Thus, irradiated foods will not be labeled as such, and consumers are going to be left in the dark about all this (except for those who actually eat the irradiated food, in which case they will glow in the dark).

The FDA, of course, insists that the levels of irradiation used to kill e.coli will have no effect whatsoever on the nutritional value of the food. This astonishing statement comes from an agency that doesn't believe food has any nutritional value in the first place, so lowering the value to zero by destroying all the phytonutrients does not, in the opinion of the FDA, alter its nutritional value at all. Thus, destroying all the anti-cancer nutrients in a head of broccoli merely brings that broccoli into "compliance" as a non-functional food, according to the FDA.

Radiation, of course, destroys delicate phytochemicals in plants -- the very phytochemicals protecting consumers against cancer, heart disease, high cholesterol, inflammation and other diseases. Microwaving broccoli, for example, destroys up to 98% of its anti-cancer nutrients. (The FDA has not yet acknowledged this scientific fact, either.) In a similar way, irradiating food destroys much of its nutritional content, including vitamins, carotenoids, anthocyanins and other delicate protective nutrients that are right now providing the last, desperate nutritional defense against the American diet of meat, milk, fried foods and processed junk.

Irradiating fresh produce will leave the U.S. population is a state of extreme deficiency in protective plant-based nutrients.

Does the FDA plan to destroy the health of the U.S. population?

Many people suspect that's what the FDA really wants. A nutritionally-deficient, disease-ridden population would mean a windfall of profits for the FDA's buddies in Big Pharma -- the folks who sell patented medications at monopoly prices. With the food supply destroyed by radiation, ordinary people would have virtually no remaining sources of protective phytonutrients!

In promoting this food radiation policy, the FDA has accomplished what all the terrorists in the world could not: The mass irradiation of the U.S. food supply -- much like setting off a dirty bomb over the nation's farms (but with less radiation). This destruction of the nutritional value of the food supply is a far greater threat to the health of the U.S. population than any terrorist event, including 9/11. And yet it is being done by our own people, TO our own people, by a lawless agency that answers to no one. FDA officials are not voted into office by the People; they are appointed by politicians. They answer to no one, they refuse to follow federal law, and they operate as tyrants over a quarter of the U.S. economy.

And now they have taken it upon themselves to destroy the national food supply.

We should be more than just alarmed -- we should be outraged! The FDA has committed an act of war against the People. With this decision, the FDA has firmly positioned itself as an enemy of the People, and a bringer of death and disease to the nation. Why are our elected representatives in Washington allowing this madness?

Think about this: If the FDA has its way:

• All your food will be irradiated, pasteurized or killed
• All your children will be vaccinated
• All your medicine will be based on pharmaceuticals
• All your free speech about health will be suppressed
• All informative labeling on food and supplements will be outlawed
• Growing and selling non-irradiated garden vegetables will become a crime!

Today it's spinach and lettuce; tomorrow it's all fresh produce

Don't think the FDA will stop with spinach and lettuce, either. They're already talking about irradiating tomatoes, peppers and onions. Before long, radiation could become mandatory for ALL fresh produce, and all the fresh fruits and vegetables that are supposed to contain health-protecting nutrients will be transformed into sterile, inert plant mass with no health benefits at all. (Brilliant scam, huh?)

This is by design. I believe the FDA wants the American public to be sickened and diseased. Why else would they ban Free Speech about healing foods like cherries, broccoli and garlic? Why would they outlaw the selling of herbs and nutritional supplements that claim to treat and prevent disease? The FDA wants you to be sick, enslaved and medicated, and irradiating the food supply is the quickest way to accomplish that.

He who controls the food controls the People.

He who destroys the food can profit from the People's sickness.

The FDA's crimes against humanity

In pushing this radiation agenda, the FDA is committing a crime against humanity -- a nutritional atrocity that violates fundamental human rights. And yet the FDA's top decision makers continue to operate with zero oversight and zero accountability. They make decisions in a corporate-sponsored vacuum, absent any input from reasonable, health-conscious consumers or scientists. And because they have been granted tyrannical powers by Congress, the FDA operates above the law.

It is not subject to any laws whatsoever; not even the U.S. Constitution which is supposed to protect the People's right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" (as stated in the Declaration of Independence).

The mass irradiation of the food supply is a violation of the "Life" part of that phrase, wouldn't you agree? If we can no longer buy nourishing foods with their nutrients intact, then we are all doomed to degenerative disease and death... but not before paying out our life savings to doctors, drug companies and hospitals. That's the evil genius of the food irradiation plot: It kills you slowly, at just the right pace to drain your bank account before you expire from malnutrition.

I truly believe this irradiation of the food supply is the beginning of the end of America. No nation can survive the destruction of its food supply. The FDA is dooming America to a slow, painful, medicated death. In a generation, this nation will be lost, destroyed from within by short-sighted tyrants who violated nature and left the People to rot.

What you can do right now to fight this latest transgression by the FDA

For starters, you can:

1) Grow your own food. A little gardening is good. Grow whatever you can, even if it's just a few kitchen herbs.

2) Buy your food at farmer's markets, coops and CSAs. See

3) Ask your grocery store if they are buying irradiated spinach. If they don't know, demand they find out!

4) Raise hell with your Senators and Congresspeople, demanding they pass new laws protecting consumers from the FDA and its plot to destroy the nutritional value of the food supply.

Also, listen to two podcasts I've posted on this topic. The first was recorded several months ago, where I publicly predicted the FDA would do exactly what we're seeing right now. Listen to that podcast here:

The second podcast was just posted today. I recorded it right before writing this article. It goes into much greater detail about the FDA's plot to destroy the health of the U.S. population. You can listen to that here:

Finally, don't stand for this food supply madness! Raise your voice. Write your local paper, call your representatives in Washington and tell them you strongly oppose the irradiation of the food supply. Teach people about phytonutrients. And stay tuned to NaturalNews as we continue to cover this important story.

The FDA has gone mad. Criminally mad. It is an agency that will literally kill you if given the chance, and it is up to all of us to stop this madness before we lose our health, our children and our very nation.

Buzz up!410 votesBoost this article on YahooBuzz! Click "BuzzUp!"

FDA Plots to Mislead Consumers Over Irradiated Foods

(NaturalNews) NaturalNews has learned that the FDA is intentionally plotting to deceive consumers over the labeling of irradiated foods, attempting to eliminate any requirement for informative labeling or replace the word "irradiated" with "pasteurized."

In a feature story published by NaturalNews yesterday, we stated that the FDA does not require foods to be labeled as irradiated. We received a lot of questions from readers about that point, with some stating the FDA does, in fact, require foods to be labeled when irradiated. This is not always correct: Most foods are not required to be labeled as irradiated. This story explains the FDA's food irradiation labeling policy in more detail and reveals the FDA's plot to deceive consumers by misleading them into thinking irradiated foods are NOT irradiated.

Foods that are exempt from irradiation labeling

According to current FDA regulations, any food used as an ingredient in another food does NOT have to be labeled as irradiated. For example, if you buy coleslaw, and the cabbage in the coleslaw has been irradiated, there is no requirement that the coleslaw carry any labeling indicating it has been irradiated.

However, if raw cabbage is irradiated, then current FDA regulations do require it to carry an irradiation label. This label, however, is a symbol, not text, and many consumers have no idea what the symbol really means -- it actually looks like a "fresh" symbol of some sort. In no way does it clearly indicate the food has been irradiated. This is the FDA's way to "hide" the fact that these foods have been irradiated. (The symbol looks a lot more like leaves under the sun than food being irradiated...)

That same head of cabbage, by the way, if served in a restaurant, requires absolutely no irradiation labeling. All restaurant foods are excused from any irradiation labeling requirement. As stated at the FDA's own website (1):

Irradiation labeling requirements apply only to foods sold in stores. For example, irradiated spices or fresh strawberries should be labeled. When used as ingredients in other foods, however, the label of the other food does not need to describe these ingredients as irradiated. Irradiation labeling also does not apply to restaurant foods.

How the FDA plans to deceive consumers and further hide the fact that foods are being irradiated

As stated above, the FDA does not want consumers to realize their foods are being irradiated. Consumer awareness is considered undesirable by the FDA; an agency that also works hard to censor truthful statements about nutritional supplements and functional foods. Accordingly, the FDA pursues a policy of enforced ignorance of consumers regarding irradiated foods, nutritional supplements, medicinal herbs and all sorts of natural substances. It is currently illegal in the United States to state that cherries help ease arthritis inflammation if you are selling cherries. (

On the food irradiation issue, the FDA is now proposing two things that are nothing short of astonishing in their degree of deceit:

FDA proposal #1: Irradiated foods shouldn't be labeled as irradiated unless consumers can visibly tell they're irradiated.

This ridiculous proposal by the FDA suggests that foods shouldn't be labeled as irradiated unless there is some obvious material damage to the foods (like their leaves are wilting). Thus, foods that don't appear to be irradiated should not have to be labeled as irradiated.

Imagine if this same ridiculous logic were used to regulate heavy metals content in foods: If consumers can't SEE the heavy metals, then they should be declared free of heavy metals!

FDA proposal #2: Irradiated foods should be labeled as "pasteurized," not "irradiated."

This FDA proposal is so bizarre that it makes you wonder whether the people working at the FDA are smoking crystal meth. They literally want irradiated foods to be labeled as "pasteurized."

And why? Because the word "pasteurized" sounds a lot more palatable to consumers, of course. Never mind the fact that it's a lie. Irradiated foods are not pasteurized, and pasteurized foods are not irradiated. These two words mean two different things, which is precisely why they each have their own entries in the dictionary. When you look up "irradiated," it does not say, "See pasteurized."

But the FDA is now playing the game of thought police by manipulating the public with screwy word replacement games that bear a strange resemblance to the kind of language used in the novel 1984 by George Orwell. And it is, indeed, an Orwellian kind of mind game that the FDA wants to play with the food supply: After unleashing Weapons of Mass Destruction (radiation) onto the foods, the FDA wants to label them all as simply being "pasteurized," keeping consumers ignorant and uninformed.

How do I know the FDA wants to do this? The agency said so itself in an April 4, 2007 document filed in the Federal Register (Volume 72, Number 64). As published in the document (2):

FDA is also proposing to allow a firm to petition FDA for use of an alternate term to "irradiation'' (other than "pasteurized''). In addition, FDA is proposing to permit a firm to use the term "pasteurized'' in lieu of "irradiated,'' provided it notifies the agency that the irradiation process being used meets the criteria specified for use of the term "pasteurized'' in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) and the agency does not object to the notification.

Did you follow all that mind-warping logic? The FDA is essentially begging a company to petition it to use the term "pasteurized" instead of "irradiated" as long as they both result in the food being killed. Once it receives such a petition, it will approve it, claiming it is meeting "the needs of industry."

The FDA already allows lots of word substitutions in the areas of health and medicine. The phrase "Toxic Poison" has been replaced with "Chemotherapy," for example. "Over-medicated with dangerous psychiatric drugs" has been replaced with the term, "Treatment." And the phrase, "Regulated with life-threatening synthetic chemicals" has been replaced with the word "managed," as in "her diabetes has been managed."

So why not introduce all sorts of other word substitutions that might continue the Orwellian "Ministry of Language" propaganda put forth by the FDA?

I say we substitute the word "medicated" with "treated" and "treated" with "rewarded." That way, when a patient describes what drugs she's on, she can say, "I've been rewarded with ten different prescriptions!"

Better yet, let's replace the word "surgery" with "enhancement." So anybody who undergoes heart bypass surgery, for example, can say they've really just had "Heart bypass enhancement!"

It sounds a lot easier to swallow, doesn't it? And that's what it's all about, folks, when it comes to irradiating the food supply: Making it all sounds a lot less treacherous than it really is. Control the words and you control people's ideas, and if there's one thing the tyrannical FDA is really, really good at, it's controlling words!

What the FDA really wants to accomplish

Let's get down to some blunt truth about the FDA's real genocidal agenda. What the FDA wants here is two things:

1) The destruction of the food supply (genocide)
2) The complete ignorance of the consuming public (nutritional illiteracy)

Genocide and illiteracy. Ignorance and fear. Tyranny, radiation and chemicals... These are the things the FDA truly stands for.

That pretty much sums up the FDA's intent on this whole food irradiation issue. Destroy the food and mislead the People. And then wait for the windfall of profits at Big Pharma as the People degenerate into a mass of diseased, disoriented and desperate health patients. It's business as usual at the FDA.

That's why Dr. James Duke, creator of the world's largest phytochemical database (, had this to say about the FDA's food irradiation policy:

"Perhaps the FDA should call up a billion dollar team to consider irradiating another health hazard - the FDA itself, which is almost as dangerous to our health as the pharmaceutical industry."

Why I call this the unleashing of "Weapons of Mass Destruction"

In my previous article on this issue, I've called this food irradiation agenda a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" against the food supply. A couple of readers questioned me about that. Why, they asked, do I consider food irradiation to be a WMD?

WMDs include weapons that indiscriminately cause damage to people and infrastructure that serves the People. Dumping a radioactive substance into the water supply that serves a major city, for example, would be considered using a Weapon of Mass Destruction.

Interestingly, the use of Depleted Uranium by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan is also an example of Weapons of Mass Destruction, making the U.S. guilty of yet more crimes against humanity. (A previous example is the dropping of nuclear weapons on Japan's civilian population in World War II.)

Irradiating the food supply is also an application of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and here's a thought experiment that will clearly demonstrate it:

Suppose you wanted to irradiate your own garden vegetables. The minute you start trying to buy a machine that produces radiation, you would be quickly considered a terrorist and investigated by the FBI. They would visit your home and ask, "Why do you need a radiation machine?" And if you said you needed to irradiate your garden vegetables, they would look at you like you were completely nuts and probably haul you into the local FBI field office for yet more questioning, all while considering you a possible terrorist and likely adding your name to the no-fly list so you could never travel on commercial airlines.

If you don't believe me, try to acquire a high-powered radiation emitting device and see what happens...

So why is it considered bizarre and possibly criminal when an individual buys a radiation machine to irradiate their own foods, but when the FDA pushes the same agenda on a larger scale, they call it "safety?"

Irradiated food isn't altered, claims the FDA

Of course, the FDA says the irradiated food isn't altered by the radiation. This statement is an insult to the intelligence of anyone with a pulse. Why? Because if the radiation doesn't alter anything, then how can it kill e.coli and salmonella?

The whole point of the radiation is to kill living organisms. And it works by causing fatal damage to the tissues and DNA of those microorganisms. So guess what it does to the plants? Since radiation isn't selective, it also irradiates the plant fibers and tissues, causing DNA damage and the destruction of enzymes and phytochemicals.

Amazingly, the FDA claims this does not count as "altering" the food because these changes aren't visible.

If it weren't such a nutritional atrocity, it would be downright hilarious. DNA changes are not visible to the human eye, but they can result in serious health consequences. Just ask anyone born with two Y chromosomes.

Eat up, guinea pigs!

Of course, the radiation pushers will claim that nobody really knows whether irradiating the food kills just 1% of the phytochemicals or 99% (or something in between). And they don't know what the long-term effect is on human health, either. This is exactly my point: The irradiation of fresh produce is a dangerous experiment, and we've all been involuntarily recruited as guinea pigs.

I will be curious to see a serious scientific inquiry into the nutritional damage caused to fresh produce by irradiation. I also find it simply astonishing that this decision by the FDA has been made in the absence of such scientific studies. Much like it does with the pharmaceutical industry, the FDA prefers to poison the people first, and then figure out later just how much damage might have been caused.

I say when you're dealing with the food supply, you should err on the side of caution. We are talking about the health of the nation here. This is not a small matter. It should be treated with extreme caution, skepticism and scientific scrutiny. Instead, it is being addressed with a gung-ho attitude framed in mind games and enforced ignorance.

In other words, rather than figuring out whether food irradiation is actually safe, the FDA would rather simply pretend it is.

Welcome to Make Believe Land, where all your food is now safe and nutritious, courtesy of the FDA!




Buzz up!37 votesBoost this article on YahooBuzz! Click "BuzzUp!"

Gallo's Egg Continues To Crack as the Truth About AIDS Hatches

The Robert Scott Bell Blog

The Robert Scott Bell Blog

Gallo's Egg Continues To Crack as the Truth About AIDS Hatches

Posted: 22 Aug 2008 10:10 PM CDT

Headline: "Elite" HIV wife may hold secret to AIDS vaccine "Infected at least 10 years ago by her husband, the woman is able somehow to naturally control the deadly and incurable virus..." Did it ever occur to doctors that maybe she is just plain healthy? I find it rather interesting that these so-called non-progressors are called elitists.

She is a so-called "elite suppressor..."

It's an ironic description made by member scientists of a well-funded religion that demands worship of a retrovirus called HIV. The only actual "suppressing" going on is the suppression of the truth about AIDS. HIV does not cause it. The description of people testing "positive" to HIV, but not succumbing with immune collapse, as "suppressors" also brings to light the wrong-headed assumption that healthy people suppress disease in order to get or stay well. Is this how healthy people really stay healthy?

Perhaps in Louis Pasteur's childhood daydreams. Calling Antoine B├ęchamp. The truth is that when you are healthy, pathogens cannot breed and grow unchecked to result in a diagnosis of infection. Perhaps that is much too simple to understand for those that still believe that HIV tests actually detect HIV. Even the inventor of PCR (Nobel laureate Karry Mullis) stated that his breakthrough cannot be used as a diagnostic tool to detect the presence or absence of HIV.

Who pulled the pharmaceutical wool over planet earth? Even though it's a criminal enterprise, the pharmaceutical magic spell to cloud men's minds is wearing off as the wool is wearing thin. Truth is an unstoppable force, much like freedom, or love, it can be suppressed for a time, but it always breaks out somewhere else. What was it that the Terrence Mann character said in Field of Dreams?

"People will come, Ray."

It may look like an obscure Amish barn now, but the truth about HIV is getting a major upgrade thanks to Clark Baker and Gallo's Egg. The house that HIV built will crumble like the used toothpicks from which it was built. Or should I say that the house that HIV built will go down in the flames ignited by the AZT-laced matchsticks from which it was built? Either way, it will not be long before the world knows the criminal behavior of those that propped up the false causation hypothesis for money, status and power while hundreds of thousands went to pharmaceutical drug-induced deaths.

Anybody else fed up with the HIV death cult?

If you have not already done so, following are relevant audio archives on the topic of HIV, AIDS and Gallo's Egg:

New! I was interviewed by my good friend, Michael Badnarik, regarding Clark Baker's report: Mon., August 11, 2008: Playlists: M3U | RAM (Individual MP3s: Hr1 Hr2 )

Program #336 Cohost: Robert Scott Bell, my personal friend and syndicated talk show host. You can find Robert online at and

HIV/AIDS Hoax Robert points us to a report called which suggests that the conclusion that HIV causes AIDS is seriously flawed. Clark Baker is an independent researcher who is investigating the criminal fraud behind the medial industry's insistence that pharmaceuticals are the only valid treatment.
References: Gallo's Egg Peter Duesberg Celia Farber

Even more podcasts for download:

81525 The Clean Hands of Peter Duesberg & Celia Farber - 8/3/2008 - Hour 2

81337 Exclusive BONUS Off-Air Interview with Peter Duesberg and Celia Farber 08/03/2008

80174 The Robert Gallo HIV Egg is Cracking - 7/27/2008- Hour 2

80163 Exclusive Interview With Clark Baker and David Steel on HIV, AIDS and Gallo's Egg

76260 Exclusive Interview with Peter Duesberg - 5/25/2008

Older audio archives can be found here:

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Another Great Vitamin B Raid?

Newspapers in 1992 proclaimed it The Great B Vitamin Raid. Armed agents stormed into the office of Jonathan Wright, MD taking hostage the clinic’s supply of Vitamin B-12 and B-complex along with the clinic’s computers, books, files, mailing list, and office equipment.

No charges were ever filed against Dr. Wright (details available in the December 17, 2007 December 17, 2007 issue of AAHF Pulse of Health Freedom). But the FDA’s action to retaliate against him was telling in three ways. First, the FDA admitted it did not have the evidence required for a search warrant. Second, the raid was clearly in retaliation for a suit filed by Wright after an earlier raid targeting the common amino acid l-tryptophan at Wright’s facility. And third, the FDA’s bias against supplements and in favor of the prescription drug industry continues to this day. This bias is what connects the dots in a variety of recent FDA actions that might otherwise seem unrelated.

Vitamin B-6 Now Under Assault

Recently, Medicure Pharma submitted a citizen’s petition to the FDA asserting the all dietary supplements containing pyridoxal 5’-phosphate (the natural bioactive form of Vitamin B6 known as P5P supplements) should be banned. As discussed in the July 7, 2008 issue of AAHF Pulse of Freedom, Medicure Pharma wanted to see this natural form of Vitamin B-6 banned from the dietary supplement industry in order to ensure the exclusivity of its drug product, MC-1.

There are prescription forms of various natural nutrients including potassium, coenzyme Q-10, and bromelain, among others. But this hasn’t been used as justification to ban the natural form.

B vitamins -- some of our most basic vitamins -- seem especially at risk at the moment. The law states clearly that natural substances may not be patented. But Merck holds a patent on a natural form of Folate (vitamin B-9), the calcium salt of 5-methyl tetrahydrofolate, considered by many to be the best natural form of Folate.

Dr. Steven W. Bailey, a researcher, was able to get five patents issued on the basis of his work with this form of Folate. Merck Eprova acquired license to more than one patent covering the use of 5-methyl tetrahydrofolate, selling it under the trade name Metafolin.

Merck has since only sold this supplement in large bulk quantities and imposed stringent restrictions of the use of Metafolin in dietary supplements that include what formulas and dosages can and cannot be used. Bristol Myers Squibb also obtained a patent in 1999 for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease using Folate.

What This Means For All Of Us

B vitamins are essential nutrients. Dr. Kilmer McCully showed us that key B-vitamin nutrients help control the enzyme homocysteine, a known risk factor for heart disease as well as other conditions.

There is another reason why all of us need vitamins and other supplements and why it is essential to be able to buy them at normal prices, not patented drug prices. A British study by physician Dr. Dave Thomas (using The Chemical Composition of Food in the years 1940 through 1990) showed that most if not all fruits and vegetables have had declining nutrients over that 50-year span. Recent USDA research confirms this fact.

Factory farming has changed the nutrient composition of soil and brought unripened products to the marketplace. The emphasis now is on size, appearance, and a longer shelf-life to sell the product, not on nutritional content.

This analysis was triggered by a British physician’s curiosity. His patients had a myriad of chronic diseases yet all claimed to ‘eat well.’ Indeed, government analyses in the US continue to confirm that there is a correlation between a nutrient poor diet and chronic degenerative disease.

Americans are well fed, and in many cases overfed, yet undernourished. Arizona university research has revealed that most American children get key nutrients only from their morning breakfast cereal. Additional Arizona university research has shown that most Americans get their daily vitamin C from their morning orange juice.

Fewer than ten percent of Americans get the right amount of fruits and vegetables, key sources of nutrients. And a growing number of academia-based experts indicate it is impossible to get the nutrients we need from diet alone. Under these circumstances, supplementation is essential.

May 2005 research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (as analyzed by Jeffrey Bland, Ph.D. in the Functional Medicine Monthly) notes the fact that 78% of our nation’s health care dollars go to the treatment of chronic diseases. A diet rich in processed foods, nutrient depleted foods, and a sedentary lifestyle are correlated with our nation’s alarming rates of type II diabetes, heart disease, asthma, allergies, and a host of other chronic diseases.

Combine this with the concept of drug-induced nutrient depletion. For example, oral contraceptives result in lower levels of vitamins that include B-6 as well as other B-vitamins. Steroids deplete the body of more nutrients than any other single classification of drugs.

Magnesium deficiency is widespread thanks to the generous use of certain heart disease related medications including diuretics for high blood pressure and congestive heart failure. According to some, we are now in the midst of a potential crisis of coenzyme Q-10 deficiency because statin drugs deplete this vital nutrient and statin drug use is at an all time high. Most recently, pediatricians have been told by medical authorities to give statins to children as young as age 8.

The sale of statins has also led to the demonization of cholesterol, a substance that our bodies and especially our brains need, and an effort by drug companies to redefine normal levels of total cholesterol down.

At time when Americans get far too little of key nutrients such as Folic Acid (B-9) because of their consumption of processed grain products, we cannot afford to ignore the move by drug companies either to ban natural vitamins or to patent them. This will restrict our use of these key nutrients and raise the costs of healthcare at a time when those costs have already spiraled out of control, in part because of drug prices. Protecting our access to key natural nutrients is good medicine, for you and me and for this nation.

Monday, August 18, 2008


We can no longer trust anyone to inject, in any way, anything into our bodies for any reason.

Flu Mist a popular over the counter live flu vaccine has been found to contain two H5N1 DNA markers, these markers seem to have been sewn into the flu mist vaccine to ensure that H5N1 or another strain of Avian Flu goes pandemic.

This is going to cause major problems before long, it is imperative that people are warned about flu mist.

This is the Natural Solutions Foundation’s current best Intelligence Estimate regarding the potential weaponized avian flu pandemic.

Disclaimer: No one knows if the pandemic will be unleashed. Let us pray that it will not. However, we note with alarm that there are an increasing number of indicators suggesting that this Pandemic is being prepared to be used against us all using a variety of weaponized viruses. If our ringing of the alarm bells is successful, we will be spared - and we will have been wrong. Let us all devoutly hope that the Natural Solutions Foundation’s urgent and effective information dissemination is that successful.

Please help to make the Pandemic secret so ineffective that the authors of this nightmare are backed off by our shared awareness. Disseminate this information to everyone you know and ask them to do the same.

Latest Updates

Natural Solutions Foundation brings you on-going updates of breaking news and background information on the pandemic avian flu which, we believe, is being carefully engineered for possible introduction in the US (and perhaps elsewhere). Here is the latest information:

August 13, 2008

Newly “discovered” strains of the H5N1 Avian Flu virus are found in Nigeria. There is no way that bird migration could account for the appearance of a strain of the virus found in Iraq, Afghanistan and Italy in the absence of this year’s migration.

Garba Sharabutu, professor of veterinary medicine and president of the Nigerian Veterinary Association, disputes claims that the virus is a new strain or that it is highly pathogenic.

Transmission of the disputed “new strain” of Avian Flu in Nigeria to a human worker who developed a fever did not occur despite fears that the strain could cause humans to get sick.

The new African strain is not H5N1 at all, but H9N2, according to Public Library of Science Journal, PLOS One. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), there are hundreds of strains of avian influenza viruses, four of which (H5N1, H7N3, H7N7 and H9N2), however, can be transmitted to humans.

13 Indonesians with respiratory problems, fever and a history of contact with chickens tested negative for Avian Flu. “Health officials announced on Sunday that the 13 people from a village in North Sumatra province, Sumatra, who were hospitalized with complaints of fever and respiratory problems have tested negative for bird flu virus.

Nyoman Kandun, the health ministry’s director-general of communicable disease control, said, “Test results were negative for all suspected cases.”

“Highly pathogenic” H7 Bird Flu strain found in Oxfordshire, England, June, 2008. Strain said to pose “no threat to [human] health.

1918 Influenza Pandemic

“The effect of the influenza epidemic was so severe that the average life span in the US was depressed by 10 years. The influenza virus had a profound virulence, with a mortality rate at 2.5% compared to the previous influenza epidemics, which were less than 0.1%. The death rate for 15 to 34-year-olds of influenza and pneumonia were 20 times higher in 1918 than in previous years (Taubenberger). People were struck with illness on the street and died rapid deaths. One anectode shared of 1918 was of four women playing bridge together late into the night. Overnight, three of the women died from influenza (Hoagg). Others told stories of people on their way to work suddenly developing the flu and dying within hours (Henig). One physician writes that patients with seemingly ordinary influenza would rapidly “develop the most viscous type of pneumonia that has ever been seen”

1. Weaponized Flu Summary
2. Current Intelligence Estimate
3. Third Party Substantiation Links

Some concerned individuals have been asking for a Weaponized Avian Flu Summary, so we’ve updated the original posting at:

That posting now includes:

Weaponized Avian Flu Summary

A copy of Dr. Laibow’s original eAlert of July 19, 2008 - Updates are at the bottom of that posting

Update #1 - July 22, 2008: What a Response!

Update #2 - July 23, 2008: Your Coffins, from Uncle Sam…
More dots:

Update #3 - Model State Emergency Powers Act

Update #4 - Additional Blog Postings - Press Release Refused Distribution! and more…

Update #5 - Preparedness for Pandemic

Current Intelligence Estimate

1. We have been examining the historical record for latency and infectious periods (for example, for the 1918 pandemic and for the unweaponized Avian Flu). The latency period could be up to 2 weeks.

2. Our current best estimate is that people could start to notice symptoms as soon as a week after disbursal of the pathogen; the disease will, if especially virulent, cause death within 72 hours of first symptoms. The current unweaponized flu is deadly to 2/3 of those who catch it.

3. For example, if the pathogen were released, say, at the end of the Olympics, on August 23rd or 24th, people would start to notice symptoms by the end of the Labor Day Holiday (US Labor Day is September 1st this year).

4. By the time most US college students are back in school, say, September 5th, the media would begin to notice and the public authorities would be empowered to act, we suspect, within 72 hours of mass media notice (we believe the alternative media might “get wind” of the impending pandemic a day or a half day earlier).

5. That brings us to September 8th. We can expect national “lock down” and Martial Law within a couple days, as people panic to obtain food and protection. Places of public accommodation closed. End of Internet communications; possibly of telephone as well.

We note that the “Pandemic Avian Flu Vaccine” is scheduled to be delivered to the United States from the Chinese pharmaceutical plant where it is being made during August. The government issued its “Vaccine” allocation plan about a week ago.

People have also asked for links to original information from which we’ve extracted the “dots” that lead to the the Intelligence Estimate we developed suggesting the flu pandemic could occur as early as September, 2008.

Substantiation Links

Here are some outside links that give rise to some of the elements of this Intelligence Estimate:

“Pandemic Flu Vaccine” allocation:

NorthCom site:

NIH Avian Flu “trials” -

Drug Co - US contract -

Illegal “Pandemic Flu Vaccine” test:


House Of Lords Warning:


Dr. Laibow’s Preparedness Video:

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Gallo's Rotten Egg is Cracking

ReThink HIV & AIDS


The Origins of AIDS TV Film


Does Hiv cause Aids?
Lots of scientists say ‘no.’ Read more.

The Perth Group

Treatment Information Group

Immunity Resource Foundation

Alberta Reappraising Aids Society

Peter Duesberg on AIDS

Rethinking AIDS

What is AIDS?


HEAL: Alternative Health
and AIDS information

Alive & Well

Living Without HIV Drugs

AIDS Myth Exposed

"You Bet Your Life"

HEAL Toronto


HIV, AIDS & Gallo'sEgg

by Clark Baker - July 21, 2008

"I began this investigation in May and have since farmed ALL of my other investigations to other investigators. I intend to remain engaged in this until the courts and/or legislature has ended this criminal enterprise.."

"After having investigated thousands of crimes and arrested hundreds of criminal gang members and other assorted predators, I know a criminal enterprise when I see one."

"HIV/AIDS makes Enron look like a neighborhood poker game."

"I have never written about anything more important. This story changed my life, and if you have the time and patience to understand what I have written, it may change yours as well.

If Americans, our courts, and our legislature permit the continued corruption of science and medicine by our pharmaceutical industry, I fear that the 232-year experiment we call “The United States of America” will have failed."

- Clark Baker

I learned how hospitals destroy good physicians and how predatory hospital chains like Tenet, Kaiser Permanente, and Adventist pressure local physicians already in successful private practice to join their groups. Those who refuse are targeted for sham peer review by corporate administrators and MDs who accuse non-compliant physicians as dangerous, incompetent, or disruptive. While a few tenacious victims expend their life savings to preserve their clinical privileges, others aren't so lucky. Faced with the malicious and devastating loss of their medical careers, many take their own lives; which is what the health care corporations prefer anyway. To them, it's only business – nothing personal.

I was never impressed by concerns about "the evils of big pharma." I assumed that drugs are expensive because of the R & D that goes into finding cures for disease. Until now, I never imagined that some of those same drug companies would support junk science to fund researchers who would then produce expensive drugs that cause illness and disease around the world; or support junk legislation that would force healthy mothers and their children to take drugs that kill (under the threatened loss of child custody), and then use their subsequent sickness and mortality as evidence that a non-existent disease actually exists.

Such a scheme would have made Machiavelli weep with joy.

A New Investigation

I was not concerned about "big pharma" until my visit to Washington DC last May. I was there to meet with members of Semmelweis Society International (SSI). This is an impressive group of medical professionals – physicians, nurses, surgeons, medical and law school professors, and former CEOs of health care corporations. Because of my own experience with retaliation and my ongoing interest in US healthcare and sham peer review, I was interested to hear their stories directly from them.

I accompanied Gil Mileikowsky, MD, the OB/GYN who first explained sham peer to me in 2006. I spent five days with the members – all dedicated men and women who care deeply about the political corruption of healthcare and who risked their own careers to report fraud or abuse within the healthcare system. I recorded and edited their testimony, and posted this video after members testified before the US Congress and Senate. I was also honored to testify regarding my experience as an LAPD whistleblower.

Two recipients of the Semmelweis "Clean Hands Award" were reporter Celia Farber and molecular biologist Peter Duesberg, PhD. I had not heard of them before and knew nothing of their relationship to a little known controversy about HIV and AIDS.

After 28 years as an investigator, I consider myself pretty skeptical about things until I see proof. Most of my work today is pro bono, so I can pick and choose who I assist. Witnesses are expected to lie, but if I discover that a client has misrepresented facts or lied to me, I will usually drop the case. I'm fortunate to have the time, energy, and resources to help good people get out of undeservedly bad predicaments. Not all lawyers are like Mike Nifong or David Sotelo, and not all private investigators work like Anthony Pellicano. Without unbiased credibility, investigators are nothing more than a liability to their clients.

As various members interacted with Farber and Duesberg, I learned that the HIV/AIDS issue had not been entirely resolved. Like Dr. Mileikowsky's story about sham peer review, this sounded equally unbelievable.

When I returned to Los Angeles, several former members began to question the wisdom of presenting the awards to Farber and Duesberg. In response, SSI President (and neurosurgeon) Roland Chalifoux issued this press release to explain the rationale of the awards. But when two dissenters persisted, Dr. Chalifoux asked me to conduct an independent investigation of Ms. Farber and Prof. Duesberg, citing my investigative experience, independence, and almost complete lack of knowledge about HIV and AIDS.

I accepted the case.


"Gallo's Egg - Clark Baker on Robert Scott Bell Show"

You can listen to the podcast of the interview here

and an off air interview after the show here

Out of control: AIDS and the corruption of medical science

By Celia Farber

Joyce Ann Hafford was a single mother living alone with her thirteen-year-old son, Jermal, in Memphis, Tennessee, when she learned that she was pregnant with her second child. She worked as a customer service representative at a company called CMC Call Center; her son was a top student, an athlete and musician. In April 2003, Hafford, four months pregnant, was urged by her obstetrician to take an HIV test. She agreed, even though she was healthy and had no reason to think she might be HIV positive. The test result came up positive, though Hafford was tested only once, and she did not know that pregnancy itself can cause a false positive HIV test. Her first thought was of her unborn baby. Hafford was immediately referred to an HIV/AIDS specialist, Dr. Edwin Thorpe, who happened to be one of the principal investigators recruiting patients for a clinical trial at the University of Tennessee Medical Group that was sponsored by the Division of AIDS (DAIDS)—the chief branch of HIV/AIDS research within the National Institutes of Health.

The objective of the trial, PACTG 1022, was to compare the “treatment-limiting toxicities” of two anti-HIV drug regimens. The core drugs being compared were nelfinavir (trade name Viracept) and nevirapine (trade name Viramune). To that regimen, in each arm, two more drugs were added—zidovudine (AZT) and lamivudine (Epivir) in a branded combination called Combivir. PACTG 1022 was a “safety” trial as well as an efficacy trial, which means that pregnant women were being used as research subjects to investigate “safety” and yet the trial was probing the outer limits of bearable toxicity. Given the reigning beliefs about HIV's pathogenicity, such trials are fairly commonplace, especially in the post-1994 era, when AZT was hailed for cutting transmission rates from mother to child.

The goal of PACTG 1022 was to recruit at least 440 pregnant women across the nation, of which 15 were to be enrolled in the University of Tennessee Medical Group. The plan was to assign the study's participants to one of two groups, with each receiving three HIV drugs, starting as early as ten weeks of gestation. Of the four drugs in this study, three belong to the FDA's category “C,” which means that safety to either mother or fetus has not been adequately established.

Joyce Ann Hafford was thirty-three years old and had always been healthy. She showed no signs of any of the clinical markers associated with AIDS—her CD4 counts, which measure the lymphocytes that are used to indicate how strong a person's immune system is, and which HIV is believed to slowly corrode, were in the normal range, and she felt fine. In early June 2003, she was enrolled in the trial and on June 18 took her first doses of the drugs. “She felt very sick right away,” recalls her older sister, Rubbie King. “Within seventy-two hours, she had a very bad rash, welts all over her face, hands, and arms. That was the first sign that there was a problem. I told her to call her doctor and she did, but they just told her to put hydrocortisone cream on it. I later learned that a rash is a very bad sign, but they didn't seem alarmed at all.”

Hafford was on the drug regimen for thirty-eight days. “Her health started to deteriorate from the moment she went on the drugs,” says King. “She was always in pain, constantly throwing up, and finally she got to the point where all she could do was lie down.” The sisters kept the news of Hafford's HIV test and of the trial itself from their mother, and Hafford herself attributed her sickness and nausea to being pregnant. She was a cheerful person, a non-complainer, and was convinced that she was lucky to have gotten into this trial. “She said to me, ‘Nell’ —that's what she called me—‘I have got to get through this. I can't let my baby get this virus.’ I said, ‘Well, I understand that, but you're awful sick.’ But she never expressed any fear because she thought this was going to keep her baby from being HIV positive. She didn't even know she was in trouble.”

On July 16, at her scheduled exam, Hafford's doctor took note of the rash, which was “pruritic and macular-papular,” and also noted that she was suffering hyperpigmentation, as well as ongoing nausea, pain, and vomiting. By this time all she could keep down were cans of Ensure. Her blood was drawn for lab tests, but she was not taken off the study drugs, according to legal documents and internal NIH memos.

Eight days later, Hafford went to the Regional Medical Center “fully symptomatic,” with what legal documents characterize as including: “yellow eyes, thirst, darkening of her arms, tiredness, and nausea without vomiting.” She also had a rapid heartbeat and difficulty breathing. Labs were drawn, and she was sent home, still on the drugs. The next day, July 25, Hafford was summoned back to the hospital after her lab reports from nine days earlier were finally reviewed. She was admitted to the hospital's ICU with “acute and sub-acute necrosis of the liver, secondary to drug toxicity, acute renal failure, anemia, septicemia, premature separation of the placenta,” and threatened “premature labor.” She was finally taken off the drugs but was already losing consciousness. Hafford's baby, Sterling, was delivered by C-section on July 29, and she remained conscious long enough not to hold him but at least to see him and learn that she'd had a boy. “We joked about it a little, when she was still coming in and out of consciousness in ICU,” Rubbie recalls. “I said to her, ‘You talked about me so much when you were pregnant that that baby looks just like me.’” Hafford's last words were a request to be put on a breathing tube. “She said she thought a breathing tube might help her,” says Rubbie. “That was the last conversation I had with my sister.” In the early morning hours of August 1, Rubbie and her mother got a call to come to the hospital, because doctors had lost Hafford's pulse. Jermal was sleeping, and Rubbie woke her own daughter and instructed her not to tell Jermal anything yet. They went to the hospital, and had been there about ten minutes when Joyce Ann died.


Audio Interview with Celia Farber:

Exposing HIV/AIDS myths - Celia Farber


HIV is caused by a retrovirus, right? Well, no, not really. In fact, there is no evidence whatsoever for this hypothesis. How could they all be wrong, asks Anthony Brink on

His article is so well written that we will use it to begin our series of examinations of the discredited, but still widely believed, idea that there is such a thing as the AIDS or HIV virus and that it causes a disease now knows as HIV/AIDS.

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD

Anthony Brink

I suppose one has a greater sense of intellectual degradation after an interview with a doctor than from any other human experience. –Alice James

A response sometimes heard to the expression of doubt about the integrity of the HIV-AIDS paradigm as a medical model for understanding disease incidence is, “How could all the doctors in the world be wrong?” There are many possible answers to this question.

One might point out that unanimity has never guaranteed the soundness of medical constructs, and examples of this abound. The history of medicine both ancient and modern is a wrecking-yard full of broken and abandoned ideas. In this century alone innumerable medical theses have collapsed to which nearly all doctors once subscribed, such as bacterial theories of scurvy, beriberi, and pellagra, and more recently, the immuno-surveillance and retroviral theories of cancer aetiology - for which billions of dollars funded thousands of convincing research papers during the “War on Cancer” declared by Nixon in 1971. Then there was swine flu: 1976 saw President Gerald Ford on television, at the behest of the American medical establishment, solemnly urging all Americans to get vaccinated against an imminent deadly influenza epidemic. About 50 million Americans were panicked into being immunised with useless or harmful vaccines rushed onto the market. Adverse reactions resulted in damages claims of $2.7 billion. Not a single case of swine flu appeared subsequent to the death of a sick recruit undergoing basic training in a boot camp in New Jersey (hardly an unusual event) that had ignited all the hysteria. Before HIV-AIDS, and alongside the mad cow craze in Britain and the avian flu folly in Hong Kong, the great swine flu fiasco was perhaps the most telling instance in recent times of how Medicine can lose its head.

Another answer to the question goes to the fact that most doctors have scarcely more than a layman’s grasp of the concepts that populate biology at its molecular horizon. For instance, most would gape dully if asked to define the peculiar characteristics of a retrovirus (like HIV, we’re told) as distinct from other viruses, or distinguish endogenous and exogenous retroviruses, or articulate the rival contentions advanced by molecular biologists about whether the whole of retrovirology might be a mistake, a wrong turn at a scientific road-fork, a bad inference drawn from the evidence of certain metabolic biochemical phenomena which look odd when seen against old-fashioned rules of molecular genetics, and the possibility that retroviruses might not exist as infectious agents at all - that it is rather the classical dogma that needs an overhaul. Taxed about the HIV theory of AIDS, most doctors can do little more than quote the claims of their authorities, like priests citing papal bulls and encyclicals, making obeisance to their cardinals.

A third answer would make the impudent point that it is fallacious to imagine that doctors generally have a superior capacity for reasoning than their patients. The notes given medical students speak to the scant education that doctors receive in this art. To read them is to see how flimsy medical and biological theories are dished up as fact for rote learning, making the kind of call-and-answer instruction one sees in farm schools in this country look like an adventure in lateral-thinking training. Doctors do so well at school because they’re the kind of guys who are the most easily schooled. In myths and legends to outdo the Hare Krishna people. Especially virologists, who occupy the haughtiest medical echelons, but who seem to have the dimmest bulbs in the upper storey. As revealed by what they swallow without a hiccup. And regurgitate to their students. Like the timeless French fancy (”Le Rage”) that a bite from a dog acting wild and crazy can make you go mad and die. (But not the dog; man is the ‘end-host’.) You can go the same way from eating steak. Although nobody can plausibly say why. Or some cancers are caused by viruses and are infectious. Or the most hilarious notion of them all: semen and vaginal secretions can be deadly. Mothers’ milk too. But not spit. All of a sudden. After millions of years. Thanks to a mutated virus from monkeys. Or maybe the moon. And all of this without any evidence. Not a shred. And there’s a funny part to it. You might be feeling fine. But you’re sure to go in six months time from any one of a couple of dozen diseases or malignancies. No, make that two years, well actually five; shall we say eight, or ten, or twelve, maybe fifteen; OK perhaps your life is just shortened a bit. Definitely? Yes, most certainly; no, not necessarily. Look, we don’t know. How, why? We don’t have the faintest idea. Theories zigzag like a drunk at the wheel. (”We are still confused, only we are now confused at a higher level of understanding.”) Excuse me. Is this the circus?

Nor do doctors necessarily proceed from a more rational mindset than Joe Public does. The opposite may be the case. That HIV-AIDS as a medical construct could have taken root so richly among doctors, despite its absurd fundamental tenets (which fly in the face of everything known to virology), illustrates the point. As Harvey Bialy, scholar in residence at the Biotechnology Institute at the University of Mexico and editor at large of the prestigious science journal Nature Biotechnology puts it, the HIV theory of AIDS “turns immunology upside down and inside out.” To begin with, never before was the presence of antibodies taken to be prognostic of future disease. They used to be thought of as good things – evidence, where the patient appears healthy, of a successful immune response to a pathogen defeated. Former molecular biology professor at Johns Hopkins and Harvard Universities, Charles Thomas predicts that after the balloon pops, historians will be studying the flight of common sense in the lunacy of the AIDS age, “for a 100 years, …how America gave AIDS to the world.” But since HIV-AIDS as a diagnostic construct is still hegemonically regnant in our time, the point about the way doctors as a group tend to think needs illustrating with a different example. What better than the turn Medicine took during the Third Reich.

The Nazis’ virulently irrational and barbarous doctrines of racial hygiene found huge appeal for German and Austrian doctors in that era. No other profession was as well represented on Nazi party membership lists. From an ostensibly sober, rational profession functioning as an elite caste in a culture that seemed itself to be the fruit of the Enlightenment, just under half of them were card-carrying Nazis. Of course not all engaged in the sadistic butchery of untermenschen for which the Nuremberg Doctors’ Trials were conducted, but it would be a mistake to imagine that such criminals were aberrant quacks from the fringes, flourishing like vermin on the opportunities created within the Nazi eugenics paradigm. In fact many medical practitioners and academics tried or named in testimony at the trials had enjoyed international eminence in their professional fields. Dr Edwin Katzenellenbogen, for instance, (who got life imprisonment) had served on the faculty of the Harvard Medical School.

Scholars of religious thinking have long known that the more horrible and improbable the founding superstitions of a new faith, the greater its capacity to mobilize the popular imagination and the stronger the force of its revolutionary engine. In Medicine, Religion’s first cousin, the same sometimes applies. Like an infant upstart religion with imperial designs, the HIV-AIDS paradigm calls for a vigorous rebellion against long-established models of understanding. Woe betide any conservative scientists reluctant to become conversos to the rude new creed, who point out that the new theory is absurd on its face, that the link between AIDS and sex is no stronger than its link with sleeping; they become marginalised like Jews defying the demands of medieval Christendom, not racked and burned, but ostracised - scientifically defrocked, blacklisted and delegitimated, stripped of research funding, banned from lecturing podia, kicked out of their laboratories, rendered unemployable in academia or industry, menaced with confinement in psychiatric wards, isolated from graduate students in whom they might instill similar heretic doubts, and barred from publishing in the journals that once craved their papers. But naturally; radical political dissident Noam Chomsky, Professor of Linguistics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology has pointed out that “if you serve power, power rewards you with respectability. If you work to undermine power…you are reviled, imprisoned, driven into the desert.” The AIDS phenomenon at root is a vast pumping aggregation of interests with enormous political and economic power. Doctors and scientists who challenge its sacred tenets risk attracting the wrath of the revolution’s red guards. They won’t be thrown from windows. But their careers will be over. For their reactionary intransigence these critics will be marked always with pejorative epithets, as persistent as tattoos, like ‘discredited’, ‘loony’, ‘maverick’, ‘dangerous’ and ‘irresponsible and pernicious’. Just to make sure we correctly tell the wits from the dunces. And to discourage us from asking, “Well, what are these guys actually saying?”

A fourth explanation lies in the fact that for all their social status and prestige, in truth doctors generally function close to the bottom of the food-chain in the medical-industrial complex, and serve as little more than a thoughtless delivery system for the pharmaceutical corporations – whose wares they peddle makes the medical drug industry one of the most profitable legal enterprises on the planet. Just how little room doctors are allowed for independent judgment founded on their own observations is revealed in the fact that in some places a doctor who declines to follow an approved treatment regimen such as chemotherapy for cancerous tumours, in view of his empirical assessment of its utter uselessness and lethal toxicity, risks sanctions from his controlling guild. Imagine the trouble a doctor would be in were he brazenly to announce his conclusion that having investigated the business, reactive HIV antibody test results are virtually meaningless - pointers to no more than heightened non-specific immunologic activity. And were he to refuse to diagnose negative or positive, selecting for life or death, like a Nazi doctor calling links or rechts. Or marking ‘+’ on the medical files of slow or crippled German children, to mark them for murder during the euthanasia programme.

In sum, one doesn’t have to cast about too far for answers to the question, “How could all the doctors in the world be wrong about AIDS?” Medicine’s penchant for screwing up magnificently, its characteristic intellectual sluggishness, and the appeal of “magical thinking” for its practitioners is plain to anyone who turns back a few pages.