THE FAUCI FILES: 1995 Prophecy: "The Fat Lady Is Singing"
fredshaw at primenet.com
Tue Oct 12 13:10:17 EST 1999
As prophesied in the July 30, 1999 issue of THE FAUCI FILES: Elton John
Edition, Harold Varmus became history as the ex-Director of the NIH on
October 7, 1999. The second part of the prediction will now complete
that prophecy as the diminutive Anthony "Mussolini" Fauci is poised to
become the next direktor of that LARGE agency as he struggles to
compensate for his vertical handicap.
Dangerous small men aside, let's review some of the prophecy by my
research associates from BEFORE the foisting of the 1996 Fauci HAART
Treatment Hoax upon which the current 1999 Fauci IL-2 Kure Hoax now
rests, along with the tens of thousands who died -- and WILL die --
in the IL-2 Human Experiment meat grinder, which continues to this
day on an even greater -- and much more lethal -- scale.
Fauci's victims will not rest in peace. It is our responsibility to see
that this little monster Fauci doesn't either... not to mention his
murderous sellout Quizzlings of the Larry Kramer, TAG, Projekt
MisInform and decomposing ACT UP corpses of the "I Love Toni" set.
The Wellcome Committee in Hell awaits ALL of these murderers!
The Fat Lady Is Singing! (July, 1995)
by Charles R. Caulfield and Billi Goldberg
The old saying is that it's not over until the fat lady starts singing.
Well, now she's screaming her siren song to the point of shattering
glass and hanging her head in shame. What's criminal about this sorry
state of affairs is that her requiem for the dead and dying continues to
fall upon deaf ears.
All of the institutionalized and scientific dogma about AIDS has now
been proven wrong--it was never right! Yet the medical myths which have
resulted in the horrible and tragic deaths of a quarter of a million
Americans are tenaciously guarded by the AIDS scientific-medical-
pharmaceutical complex. These "Doctors of Death" continue to sneer at
any and all dissenters while they continue to assault their patients
with toxic and horrific immunosuppressive "therapeutic agents."
In the article, "Agenda for U.S. AIDS research is due for a complete
overhaul," published in the April 4, 1994 The Scientist, Robert S.
Root-Bernstein calls for a re-evaluation of all theories of pathogenesis
and treatments for AIDS. He states "Identifying the sources and types of
our medical ignorance thus becomes our highest research priority." In
discussing the role of the newly formed National AIDS Task Force,
Root-Bernstein cautions that "The useful function that the Task Force
can play is to make sure that the utmost reaches of our ignorance are
quickly and efficiently identified. We will not do that by staying in
the rut that has been gouged out during the past decade, but rather by
deviating from it."
How could anyone disagree with this sobering assessment of the current
state of knowledge regarding AIDS in light of recent discoveries in
immunology and recently published journal articles? We all know who will
disagree: the scientists and doctors of AIDS Inc. who have made livings,
royalties, and careers by ignoring these advances in science. And the
death machines continue to roll along.
It's evident that every single theory how AIDS is caused and how it
should be treated have been proven wrong during recent years. The truth
about AIDS rather than the dogma is as follows: (1) HIV does not cause
AIDS by killing T4 cells; (2) CD4 (T4) cells are an invalid surrogate
marker for disease progression; (3) CD8 (T8) cells and the DTH Multitest
are valid surrogate markers; (4) antibody-based vaccines are worthless;
(5) antiretrovirals not only don't work, they kill people; (6)
prophylaxis drugs are immunosuppressive, toxic and don't stop people
from dying (except for PCP prophylaxis which extends survival); (7)
there is no latency period in AIDS; (8) all AIDS opportunistic
infections are intracellular in nature; and (9) activating the cellular
immune response (Th1) is the only way to control HIV and intracellular
infections. (For further insights on the hopelessness of the past and
present focuses, see Bernard N. Field's article "AIDS: time to turn to
basic science" in the May 12, 1994 Nature; and Flossie Wong-Staal's
"AIDS Research: A Five-Year Prospective" in the May, 1994 The Journal of
Take CD4s for example. An immunologic parameter so revered by physicians
and researchers that just over a year ago they were adopted as
"AIDS-defining" by the CDC, are now discredited by the very pioneers in
using this prognostic marker. Paul Volberding, MD, of San Francisco
General Hospital and the godfather of the early and deadly use of AZT in
asymptomatics, states in the February 2, 1994 Journal of the American
Medical Association, "Much more controversial, however, has been using
CD4+ cell counts as an acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-
qualifying diagnosis, and CD4+ cell number has been disappointing as a
surrogate marker of the clinical benefits of antiretroviral drugs."
Clinical benefits of AZT? ddI? ddC? d4T? 3TC? Protease Inhibitors? TAT
Inhibitors? Hydroxyurea? Sounds like HIV-negative dementia or knowing
where your money is coming from. The latest spin from the AIDS, Inc. is
to use HIV plasma viremia levels as a new surrogate marker to try and
prove that antiretrovirals work. Of course, they have not been able to
correlate these levels with clinical benefits or lack of disease
progression or lymphoid tissue viral infection since they have not yet
figured out how HIV causes AIDS.
Mounting evidence of the importance of CD8 T-lymphocytes as protective
and predictive elements has been largely ignored by physicians in
clinical practice. We still hear of patients having difficulty in
obtaining absolute CD8 counts from their physicians because the doctors
either think they're unimportant or in high numbers, deleterious. Yet
Florence Buseyne and Yves Riviere of the Pasteur Institute in their AIDS
1993 (v7-suppl 2) journal article, "HIV-specific CD8+ T-cell immune
responses and viral replication," state that "These CD8 T-cells may help
to maintain a low viral load in vivo, thus allowing a long asymptomatic
period of infection."
Jay M. Schlumpberger's group provides substantiation for the importance
of CD8s in the January, 1994 Journal of Family Practice. Based on the
evaluation of 133 PWAs for a period of one year, the researchers
conclude that "Our study suggests that an urgent need for new surrogate
markers of AIDS progression for use in evaluating novel therapies might
be partially addressed by the use of CD8 counts as surrogate markers in
patients with advanced HIV infection, and that potential therapies
directed at increasing CD8 counts might prove beneficial in patients
with advanced HIV infection." This determination was drawn from the
observation that ". . . for every 100 cell decline in the enrollment CD8
count, the risk of death increased by 16%." The researchers identify the
CD8 "danger-zone" for serious opportunistic infections as 400 CD8s.
Whatever microbial agents and environmental factors cause the cluster of
diseases we know as AIDS, becomes a moot point in light of this current
research. CD8 lymphocytes only proliferate in adults in response to
specialized cells presenting antigens to the immune system. The
impairment of the function of these antigen presenting cells has been
linked to the lack of proliferative responses in all T-cell subsets.
NIAID's Anthony Fauci, in AIDS 1993 (v7-suppl 2), states "The loss and
the impaired function of antigen presenting cells, (i.e. follicular
dendritic cells, dendritic cells and macrophages) are presumably the key
events over time that are responsible for the transition from the state
of immune activation associated with early stage disease to the state of
immunosuppression, invariably associated with advanced stages of
disease." Fauci has been the ultimate disbeliever, until recently, of
the involvement of antigen presenting cells in the pathogenesis of AIDS.
As of yet, we might add, only one therapeutic agent has been developed
which restores and modulates the activities of dendritic cells. This is
the skin sensitizing agent DNCB. But, as we all know, DNCB's low cost
and ready accessibility provide no financial incentive for trials of its
effectiveness, leaving its results relegated to the scrap heap of
"unsubstantiated" and "anecdotal" by the powers of AIDS Inc.
The cell-mediated cascade (Th1) of the immune system is initiated by
contact sensitization and weekly use of topically-applied DNCB according
to scientific studies. It is known that this systemic response,
utilizing the antigen presenting capability of dendritic cells and
macrophages, activates cytotoxic T lymphocytes, cytotoxic macrophages,
and natural killer cells. According to Sergio Romagnani of Italy, an
acknowledged expert in immunology, "In general, the activation of Th1
cells leads to several effector functions causing cytotoxicity, and so
progression of an immune response toward a Th1 pathway would probably be
the most appropriate for dealing with intracellular organisms and
viruses." In the same issue of Annual Review of Immunology 1994 and in
the January 28, 1994 Cell, William E. Paul, Director of the Office of
AIDS Research, supported and expanded on the importance of Th1 in
controlling intracellular infections.
Timothy R. Mosmann, discoverer of the TH1/TH2 cytokine patterns, wrote a
brilliant and elegant perspective, "Cytokine Patterns During the
Progression to AIDS," in the July 9, 1994 issue of Science. He closes by
stating "TH1-like cells may resist direct HIV infection and also be more
able to induce destruction of infected cells. . . . It is conceivable
that we could live with HIV infection provided the immune system could
contain the infection, in the same way that infection by some herpes
viruses can be life-long, yet cause minimal symptoms unless the immune
system is suppressed. If a TH1-like, cell-mediated, non-antibody
response can control HIV, this has enormous importance for the design of
vaccines and strategies for treating HIV-infected patients."
Conversely, activation of the antibody response (Th2) appears to result
in suppression of the protective cell-mediated cascade (Th1). In the
May, 1994 issue of AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses, Romagnani
expresses this danger by stating "Evidence is also accumulating to
suggest that HIV-infected subjects who mount Th2-type responses, due
either to their genetic background (e.g., individuals with atopic
allergy) or to environmental conditions (e.g., individuals living in
helminth-infested areas), may undergo more severe and active HIV
replication and therefore progress faster to AIDS."
When Dr. Raphael B. Stricker, principal investigator in a small pilot
study of DNCB users, observed a decrease in viral burden in addition to
increases in cytotoxic CD8 T-cells and natural killers cells, he was
forbidden by HRI Research Corporation of Concord, California, the owners
of the polymerase chain assay he was using in the study, to publish his
data. The letter from HRI to Stricker includes the hypocritical
statement "Upon initial conversation with our patent counsel, there is
some concern that the observation of a reduction of viral load by DNCB
may be viewed as a 'discovery' and therefore patentable subject matter.
. . I am sorry that we have to take the position not to disclose in
writing at this time." The communique was signed by George D. Cimino,
PhD, Vice-President of HRI.
Of course, the maverick and controversial Stricker disclosed his
findings during the International Conferences on AIDS in Amsterdam,
Berlin, and Yokohama, along with publishing the results in Immunology
Letters. (1993;36:1-6) and the Journal of the American Academy of
Stricker's findings were confirmed and expanded in a "pure-and-simple"
Brazilian DNCB study done by Dr. Ari Traub and presented at the 1994
10th International Conference on AIDS in Yokohama (PB0304). During the
study period (11/93-7/94), the results were as follows: (1) all of the
14 patients in the study used DNCB; (2) none of the patients developed
an opportunistic infection or malignancy; (3) all of the patients gained
weight; (4) all of the CD4 counts remained stable or had a slight
increase (p=0.002); (5) all of the CD8 counts were significantly
increased (p<0.0001); (6) there were no side-effects other than mild
eczema; and (7) none of the patients were using antiretrovirals,
prophylaxes, or alternative treatments.
Let's face it. Clinical trials of drugs are never designed to
demonstrate efficacy, but rather to bring their drugs to market. This
costs the companies hundreds of millions of dollars per drug; money they
have every intention of not only retrieving, but at a maximum profit.
Billions of industry dollars would be lost if DNCB was accepted by the
mainstream as a viable treatment for AIDS. Therefore, the focus of
research becomes higher-tech, more worthless, and less accessible to the
majority of people in the world suffering from this disease.
Gene therapy? Recombinant cytokines? Clonal expansion? Lymphocyte
infusion? Baboon bone marrow transplants? Yeah, right! Even if these and
other new hair-brained treatment schemes had a chance of working, they'd
be years away in the future, and exclusionary of the third world, the
poor in the industrialized world, and minorities, with deaths
conceivably in the hundreds of millions if we continue on the present
course. Staring right in our faces is a treatment which thousands of
people with AIDS have gained immune reconstitution, increased quality of
life, and survival. When does this preponderance of anecdotal and
scientific evidence warrant attention? Obviously, it will always be
ignored by the antiretroviral lobby. Anecdotal evidence is from and
about real people, and real people have no place in the "big picture"
except as guinea pigs in clinical trials for treatments that are
immunologically and rationally doomed to fail.
The best example to date about the failure of the scientific-medical-
pharmaceutical complex is in a recent article by Dennis Osmond and
collaborators in the April 13, 1994 Journal of the American Medical
Association. The authors determined that, for individuals at the time
their CD4 counts were 200, survival was 40.1 months from 11/86 to 11/88.
At the beginning of the AIDS pandemic, survival was 28.4 months from
10/83 to 11/86. Presently(11/88 to 11/93), the survival time from having
a CD4 count of 200 is 38.1 months. This increased survival time was not
due to antiretroviral therapy, alternative therapies, or better drugs
for prophylaxis against opportunistic infections. It was due solely to
prophylaxis against Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) which became
common in 1986. Drs. Sonnabend, Conant, and Volberding recommended its
use in the early eighties and were ignored!
Where do we go from here? Will Root-Bernstein's proposals be accepted
and evaluated by the National AIDS Task Force. Of course not. These
"Doctors of Death" can never admit their errors and responsibility for
the deaths of thousands. Survival, then, depends on individuals fighting
for their own lives in spite of and against AIDS, Inc. But, along with
our criticism and attack on the scientific-medical-pharmaceutical
complex, we have offered a safe, cheap, and non-toxic treatment
alternative that boosts cellular immunity.
Convincingly, the brilliant UCSF retrovirologist, Jay A. Levy, in the
June 24, 1995 issue of Lancet, delineates the critical importance of
activating cellular immunity in an article titled "HIV research: a need
to focus on the right target." Elegantly, Dr. Levy undercuts the AIDS,
Inc. focus on the virus and trying to stop de novo infection of new
cells by stating ". . . focusing only on the virus is akin to treating
the symptoms but not the cause." He underscores this misdirection by
adding "In both vaccine development and therapy, not enough attention
has been given to approaches that can kill virus-infected cells or
suppress virus replication by these cells." In his comparisons between
AIDS and cancer, he adds "Both diseases can remain latent for long
periods. Maintaining tumour dormancy or HIV latency may be, in fact, a
viable clinical objective, easier to attain than the long-sought cure."
There is no more we can do. Treatments for AIDS are a matter of personal
choice; the ball is now in your hands to do what you will. And, lest you
forget, the fat lady is still singing her siren song for the dead and
This is the last article of Charles R. Caulfield. He swore that he would
not die from the HIV virus and he didn't. He passed away on Sunday, July
17, 1994 from an accidental fall. His activism, altruism, compassion,
and writings have left a legacy that will live forever. In his memory,
The Fat Lady is Singing! has been updated to the present. This has
resulted in minimal additions that have provided more support for the
article's thesis: The failure of the establishment. The Anarchist AIDS
Medical Formulary (1993 North Atlantic Books: Berkeley, CA) is his
magnum opus. I have lost a dear friend. May he rest in peace. -- b.g.
More information about the Immuno