Health Education AIDS Liaison, Toronto
MANDATORY HIV TESTING
FOR PREGNANT WOMEN?
& AZT FOR THE WOMEN
WHO TEST POSITIVE??
On July 27th 1997, the American Medical Association approved a recommendation for the mandatory HIV testing of all pregnant women. This is the direction the Canadian health establishment is moving as well.
Pregnant women are under pressure to get tested for HIV. If they are found to be antibody positive, they are told they should consider aborting or undergoing toxic treatment with AZT.
House Ryan White CARE Act Reauthorization Bill's
Mandatory HIV Testing Provisions
The Ryan White CARE Act funds amount to over half a billion dollars a year, 15% of the total public spending on HIV/AIDS health care in the US. On September 18, 1995 by a unanimous voice vote, the US House of Representatives authorized the Ryan White CARE Reauthorization Act of 1995 (H.R. 1872), which included the Coburn-Waxman amendment, the mandatory testing provision.
This amendment requires states to demonstrate knowledge of the HIV status of 95% of the newborn infants born in the state within two years of implementation of the reauthorized CARE Act. If they are unable to do so, then they must implement mandatory HIV testing programs for pregnant women and newborns in order to receive Title II CARE Act funds. The deadline for full compliance is the year 2000.
THIS CAN ONLY LEAD TO ANOTHER HIV RELATED
PUBLIC HEALTH DISASTER!
Here is the argument against AZT therapy for pregnant women and mandatory testing in general:
"Ever since the thalidomide crisis we have never accepted any mutagenic substance in pregnant women again. And now we are allowing AZT in pregnant women. I am at a loss for words for this ...." -Dr Peter Duesberg
AZT, an old chemotherapy deemed too poisonous for cancer treatment, was approved after 1987 for symptomatic and then asymptomatic HIV patients in an attempt to kill the virus thought to cause AIDS. AZT is a DNA chain terminator, a poison, that terminates DNA synthesis of reproducing cells. AZT was originally designed to treat leukaemia, but after animal testing, was considered too toxic for use in humans. The U.S. Federal Drug Administration approved AZT under tremendous pressure from AIDS activists desperate for any treatment. The original AZT/AIDS drug trials were later found to be fundamentally flawed, if not fraudulent.
"It is often difficult to distinguish adverse effects possibly associated with
Zidovudine (AZT) from underlying signs of HIV disease".
- Physicians Desk Reference
Babies born to mothers taking AZT more often suffer serious birth defects; Malformed heads, extra fingers and toes, holes in vital organs like the heart....
Almost all babies born to HIV positive mothers will test positive BUT within 12-18 months 50-90% will develop their own immune system and become HIV negative.
There are serious problems with the accuracy of HIV testing especially when applied to people outside of the AIDS risk groups.
"Of the 4 million babies born each year (in the US), 1/500th of one percent, or 2000 babies, test positive. Of these 2000 babies, 80% never develop AIDS but test positive because they carry their mothers' immune cells. Universal testing of 4,000,000 to find a possible 400 raises questions of whether there are more efficient ways to protect newborns from AIDS." - Mothering Magazine
Can we trust the HIV test?
Anyone not in an "AIDS risk group" risks a
90% chance of a FALSE-POSITIVE test result!
Baye's Law
(this is a principal of statistics anyone with grade school math can understand)
Baye's Law states: When you use any test in a population with a low incidence of a disease,
you will get a huge number of false positives because NO test is perfect.
U.S. Center for Disease Control's Statistics:
Percentage of the population outside of risk groups predicted to be HIV infected:
0.006% (based on screening the U.S. blood supply).
Percentage of times the HIV test is claimed to be true-positive:
99.9%
- therefore 0.1% false positives are predicted.
Let's apply Baye's Law and these statistics to a population of 100,000 people.
100,000 X 0.006% = 6
100,000 X 0.1% = 100
100 FALSE POSITIVES
FOR EVERY 6 TRUE POSITIVES
If the accuracy slips even to 99%, as is sure to happen with the home test kits, we get:
1000 FALSE POSITIVES
FOR EVERY 6 TRUE POSITIVES
Every scientist researching HIV testing knows this,
and every public policy maker should know it.
MASS HIV TESTING IS WORSE THAN USELESS.
IT IS LIFE THREATENING.
GIVING AZT TO PREGNANT WOMEN AND THEIR BABIES IS JUST THE LATEST IN THE HIV/AIDS MADNESS.
The consequences will be:
- AZT POISONING on an unprecedented scale.
- Mothers who refuse to take AZT and resist giving it to their babies could find their physician reporting them to social services who could take the child away and force treatment. This is actually happening in some cases.
- At the moment, we cannot predict how many birth defects, cancers and other diseases will result, but they are inevitable.
- The high rate of false-positives will lead to confusion, panic, suspicion and anger.
How could we have gone so terribly wrong?
The HIV/AIDS cult of fear has thrown scientists, public health officials and the general public into a state of mass trance. Most of us have forgotten basic logic and postulates of science or have been convinced that they should be ignored. THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS.
The mandarins who control AIDS research funding are primarily retrovirologists who consumed billions of dollars of public funds in the 1970's based on their theory that they would find the cause of cancer. Cancer research based on retro-virology has been a complete failure. These same politically well connected specialists then managed to monopolize AIDS research and it has resulted in another FATAL DISTRACTION.
The HIV/AIDS hypothesis contradicts the tested and useful scientific postulates about diseases. True revolutions in the sciences are the product of a thorough reappraisal of existing principals NOT just ignoring them as "old and outdated". But ignoring these principles has been the case with HIV - from Kochs postulates to Baye's law. The HIV/AIDS hypothesis fails to explain how the syndrome develops or help people suffering from the more than 30 diseases labeled as "AIDS". It is a theory WITHOUT PREDICTIVE VALUE OR CLINICAL BENEFITS.
The failure of the HIV orthodoxy to cure AIDS is so complete that the largest
American AIDS foundation is even exploiting it for fundraising: "Latest AIDS statistics - 0,000,000 cured.
Support a cure, support AMFAR."
Fear, desperation, lots of money and greed have fueled this disaster.
13 years later, and over 40 billion dollars spent,
not one life has been saved by the HIV/AID hypothesis.
Comments by Dr. Peter Duesberg*:
"In pregnancy one of the hardest rules was for mothers not to take anything mutagenic during pregnancy. - not even an american beer which contains only a few percent of alcohol. Ever since the thalidomide crisis of the 50's - we had all these birth defects as a result of this drug that is a tranquilizer ... we have never accepted any mutagenic substance in pregnant women again. And now we are allowing AZT in pregnant women. I am at a loss for words for this .... I can't believe that this is happening in this country that prides itself in being so advanced, so progressive and knowledgable about biology. Putting AZT in a pregnant mother and a baby is beyond me."
Is AZT more damaging to a fetus or a baby than a full grown adult?
"I would say yes. I think that once you are fully developed you are less susceptible to damage from a terminator of DNA synthesis because everything is grown, is there already. But in a developing baby or fetus, where everything is growing, you are damaging randomly the brain and the bones, the lungs and the kidneys - everything is at risk for termination of DNA synthesis. Its ... I don't understand it; that it can be happening in this country."
- interview from the video HIV=AIDS: Fact or Fraud?
The Lindsay Nagel Story
Cheryl and Steve Nagel's adopted daughter Lindsay was born in Romania. Lindsay had to be tested for HIV upon entering the U.S. She tested positive and was put on AZT. The Nagels became concerned when Lindsay began to continuously wake up at night screaming about burning pains in her legs. Her growth rate slowed and she fell well below the normal weight for her age.The Nagels contacting Peter Duesberg for advice and eventually decided to take Lindsay off AZT. Lindsay's problems soon went away. But their physician continued to contest this decision and tried various ways to coerce them to continue the AZT treatment.
Lindsay is doing fine now.
But tragically, other children in her treatment group who continued to take AZT have long since died.
With Therapies Like This Who Needs Disease?
by Brian Ellison and Peter Duesberg
Lawsuits against GlaxoWellcome and treating physicians are beginning to abound - especially in cases where the HIV test turned out to be false-positive. The U.S. Federal Government cannot be sued and is immune to responsibility for creating a mass misdiagnosis based on HIV.
***
 AZT makes babies sick
Here is one of many reports on the lack of clinical
benefits of AZT treatment of HIV positive children. Dr. Rasnick shows how some HIV researchers employ the logic Alice encountered through the looking glass to come to their conclusions. Even though more than twice as many HIV+ babies soon became sick after birth to AZT treated HIV positive mothers as compared to HIV positive babies of non-medicated mothers, the researchers came up with some twisted rationale to conclude that AZT was beneficial.
Concerns About AZT (aka Zidovudine, ZDV, Retrovir - some quotes also related to other nucleoside analogs)
compiled by David Crowe of the Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society
Dozens of reasons why you might not want to follow the doctor's orders. Quotes and citations mostly from the scientific literature.
ITALIAN AZT STUDY (JUNE '99)
Italian investigators from the University of Florence report that infants whose
HIV+ mothers received the toxic drug AZT (a cytostatica) during pregnancy had
a higher probability of developing severe disease compared with (matched)
children of untreated HIV+ mothers. The children also had a higher probability of
severe immune suppression and a lower survival. (AIDS 1999, vol.13:927-933.)
Perinatal AZT: new warning on potential risk to infants
http://www.aidsmap.com/
NEWS/Last updated July 07, 1999
The UK's Committee on Safety of Medicines has issued a warning to doctors about the risk of mitochondrial dysfunction in infants born to HIV infected mothers treated with zidovudine (AZT) to prevent vertical transmission.
However, the Committee has told doctors that there are insufficient data to prove a causal relationship, and that it is important that women do not stop their treatment in an unplanned way due to scare stories about the effects of anti-retrovirals on unborn children.
The warning comes in advance of the publication of data from a French study in which it was discovered that 8 out of approximately 200 infants developed mitochondrial dysfunction following exposure to zidovudine, with or without 3TC treatment, for the prevention of vertical transmission of HIV infection.
Mitochondria are the mechanisms within cells by which glucose is transformed into energy. All nucleoside analogue drugs affect the functioning of mitochondria to some extent, and may damage mitochondrial DNA, leading to toxicities such as lactic acidosis and muscle wasting, for example.
Mitochondrial dysfunction in infants may present with neurological manifestations such as seizures and peripheral neuropathy, and other systemic effects including cardiomyopathy, lactic acidosis, exocrine pancreatic failure and bone marrow failure. Two of the infants reported in France died, and the others presented with symptoms such as seizures, severe cardiomyopathy and spastic diplegia. In three cases symptoms were asymptomatic. None of the infants were HIV infected.
for another article of this report see:
Babies at Risk
AZT CAUSES CANCER AND BIRTH DEFECTS IN OFFSPRING
A new study is presenting further evidence that Glaxo's AIDS drug AZT
(Retrovir) is causing cancer. The study showed that the offspring of
mice given the toxic drug developed at later age tumors in the lungs,
liver, and reproductive organs. The study confirms an earlier study
which showed AZT caused vaginal cancer in the offspring of mice and
rats, and in vitro tests which indicated the drug to be a potential
carcinogen. The researchers also found that the offspring of monkeys
given AZT during pregnancy incorporated the drug into their DNA. So, if
mother and child are going to survive AZT treatment (the drug can have
other fatal effects too, and is known to induce abortions and cause
serious birth defects), there is an increased risk they are going to
develop cancer later in life. AZT is not a cure, and treatment has no
clinical or lifesaving benefits. There isn't even a solid theory behind
the treatment, and prescriptions are just based on unreliable HIV tests.
Still in the U.S. alone about 5,000 pregnant women are prescribed the
toxic drug every year, and thousands of other pregnant women are
involved in AZT experiments in the rest of the world.
(Journal of the
National Cancer Institute 1997; 89:1602-1608)
* Dr. Peter Duesberg has never compromised in his critique of the theory that HIV causes AIDS. After years of experience in retro-virology he believes that retro-viruses have never been proven to cause disease in humans or wild animals. He has come to the conclusion that the use of AZT and other toxic drugs in the mis-treatment of AIDS may in fact be one of it's causes. He has sacrificed a great deal of government funding simply to state his honest opinion. In his commitment to seek the truth he has displayed stoic integrity. Dr. Duesberg is professor of molecular and cell biology, University of California at Berkeley and a member of the National Academy of Sciences.
TORONTO
tel/fax:(416) 778-4207
INDEX
Search our web site (400+ pages)
|