‘Patient 0’ not responsible for US AIDS epidemic

Gaetan Dugas was said to be the man responsible for bringing AIDS to the US, but he has now been exonerated. Dugas also died of kidney failure, which is not an AIDS-defining illness but an ARVs one.

Perhaps with a bit more digging they’ll realise that the HIV story is dangerous nonsense.

In the 1980s it was reported that scientists feared that “AIDS affects haemophiliacs differently“. Why would that be? Maybe because despite a similar biomarker the nature of their immunodeficiency is not shared with non-haemophilic HIV-positives.


Woman finds out she should’ve been diagnosed HIV-positive 30 years ago

Note how this woman who was diagnosed with HIV (but presumably not AIDS) assumes that an ex black boyfriend was responsible for her serostatus. It’s easy to blame someone you can’t find when anyone you can is not blameable. As for her mystery illness in 1983, whatever it was obviously has yet to decimate her immune system.

Is this cure for HIV also a cure for AIDS?

6 news outlets, among others, reported on the news of a possible ‘HIV cure’ after a 44-year-old British HIV+ man showed undetectable HIV in the blood following “kick and kill” treatment: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

One of the striking things about the story is that only 2 of the outlets mentioned the acronym AIDS, one of which only used it in an info box (The Sunday Times may have used the acronym but it is a pay-walled article). While this is undoubtedly trivial it shows that the disease state is now of less interest than the alleged cause.

If this man is either an ‘elite controller’ or just benignly HIV+ we cannot say with confidence that removal of ‘evidence’ of HIV averted his developing AIDS. On the flip, if this man comes to develop an AIDS-defining illness and continues to test HIV-negative would it be correct to say that disease is not AIDS simply because of the absence of ‘HIV’?

I predict this ‘cure’ will come to nothing, like all the others.