THE AIDS INDUSTRY AND MEDIA WANT YOU TO THINK THERE ARE ONLY A HANDFUL OF SCIENTISTS WHO DOUBT THE HIVAIDS THEORY.
HERES THE REALITY.
A retrospective analysis of [US] infants who remained uninfected after perinatal HIV exposure was performed. Infant and maternal medical records from January 2000 to December 2007 were reviewed and the time of seroreversion was estimated using methods for censored survival data. In total, 744 infants were included in the study, with prenatal data available for 551 mothers. The median age of seroreversion was 13.9 months, and 14% of infants remained seropositive after 18 months, 4.3% after 21 months, and 1.2% after 24 months...Infants born by vaginal delivery were more likely to serorevert at a younger age, and maternal exposure to protease inhibitors was associated with a later age of seroreversion. [which should mean that vaginal delivery (as opposed to C-Section) and avoiding AIDS drugs should be a good thing, if avoiding HIV antibodies is a good thing]Gutierrez M et al. Has Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy Increased the Time to Seroreversion in HIV Exposed but Uninfected Children?. Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Aug 23In 2008 a blood test was offered to 190,141 pregnant women [in the Netherlands] HIV prevalence was estimated to be between 0.04 and 0.08% in 2008 and was stable during the study period False-positive HIV results occurred regularly; only 24-27% of women with a positive ELISA result also had a positive confirmation After the introduction of screening in 2004, four children were born with HIV. Two mothers became pregnant before screening was introduced. One mother was HIV negative and probably became infected with HIV after the 12th week of pregnancy [but no evidence is offered that she actually had become HIV-positive]Op de Coul EL et al. Antenatal screening for HIV, hepatitis B and syphilis in the Netherlands is effective. BMC Infect Dis. 2011;11:185.maternal HIV antibody crosses the placenta and will be detectable in all HIV-exposed infants up to 18 months of age. Therefore, standard antibody tests should not be used for HIV diagnosis in newborns NAT assays [i.e. viral load] can yield qualitative (i.e., positive or negative) or quantitative (copy number per mL of plasma) results for HIV infection. Methods used for qualitative detection of HIV DNA are laboratory-specific, because no commercially available assays have been approved for clinical use. Methods used to quantitate plasma HIV RNA levels, commonly referred to as viral load tests, utilize a variety of technologies such as conventional and real-time reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR, as well as amplification methods known as branched chain DNA amplification (bDNA), and nucleic acid sequence-based amplification (NASBA). The intended use of viral load tests is to assess prognosis of disease progression and monitor the effectiveness of ART, rather than diagnosis of HIV infection in HIV-exposed infants [but, despite documenting that neither antibody tests nor NAT tests should be used with infants] The NYSDOH strongly recommends that all New York State birth facilities use the pediatric HIV testing services at the Wadsworth Center. The laboratory performs rapid turnaround NAT in addition to assays capable of detecting HIV-2 infectionDiagnosis of Pediatric HIV Infection in HIV-Exposed Infants. NY State Department of Health. 2010 Nov
http://www.hivguidelines.org/clinical-guidelines/infants-children/diagnosis-of-pediatric-hiv-infection-in-hiv-exposed-infants/When 6461 pregnant women presenting to two maternity hospitals located in the Tokyo metropolitan area of Japan from September, 2004 to January, 2006 were tested using Enzygnost HIV Integral as a first screening test, 27 showed positive reactions. When these positive reaction samples were tested using VIDAS HIV DUO Quick as a second screening test, only one of them had a positive reaction, and the remaining 26 were nonreactive.Shima-Sano T et al. A human immunodeficiency virus screening algorithm to address the high rate of false-positive results in pregnant women in Japan. PLoS One. 2010;5(2):e9382.PCR results were positive for HIV virus in 3 neonates. These infants on follow up were asymptomatic and 4 have been tested at 18 months using HIV ELISA with two different antigen tests and one rapid test to confirm the diagnosis. Surprisingly, all 3 PCR positive neonates were nonreactive to ELISA.Agarwal D, Agarwal NR. False positive HIV-1 DNA PCR in infancy. Indian Pediatr. 2008;45:245-6.The [new] Genscreen Plus HIV AntigenAntibody is an EIA [Enzyme Immuno-Assay or ELISA] for the detection of HIV infection based on the detection (sandwich technique) of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2, as well as the HIV-1 p24 antigen in human serum or plasma Using this assay in 18 infants with three consecutive negative HIV-DNA PCR we found that eight were antibody negative (age range 1824 months), and 10 were positive (age range 1920 months). Of the 10 infants positive by the fourth generation assay, nine were negative by our previous third-generation HIV assay (performed simultaneously). Repeat fourth-generation EIA testing was negative for nine infants within a few months, confirming waning levels of maternal antibody and not emerging infection. In one infant it was not possible to obtain a repeat sample but it shows no clinical evidence of HIV infection [although a positive HIV test with no symptoms is usually accepted as a genuine infection].Nastouli E et al. False-positive HIV antibody results with ultrasensitive serological assays in uninfected infants born to mothers with HIV. AIDS. 2007 May 31;21(9):1222-1223.It is generally recognized that detection of HIV antibody in infants born to seropositive mothers is not adequate to diagnose HIV infection in the infant, since maternal IgG frequently persists for as long as 18 months after birth.Human immunodeficiency virus types 1 and 2: HIV-1/HIV-2 PLUS O EIA. Bio-Rad Laboratories. 2006 AprAccording to a number of physicians at Princess Marina Hospital [in Botswana], the main public hospital in the capital of Gabarone, even with mass education most women refuse to be tested 50% of adult Tanzanian women know where they could be HIV tested, yet only 6% have been tested. In Zimbabwe, only 11% of adult women have been tested for HIV Mandatory HIV testing, and when necessary, mandatory treatment of all pregnant women in Botswana is both a necessary and a vital part of a broader comprehensive strategy for preventing the spread of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa.Clark PA. Mother-To-Child Transmission Of Hiv In Botswana: An Ethical Perspective On Mandatory Testing. Developing World Bioeth. 2006 Mar;6(1):1-12.The medical records of all rapid HIV-ELISA-positive gravidas [pregnant women] that delivered at our hospital between January 2000 and October 2001 were retrieved The results of the Western blot tests were also retrieved and correlated to the ELISA results, across varying maternal characteristics. A total of 69 patients had a positive rapid HIV-ELISA out of 9,781 deliveries. Of those, 26 were confirmed as HIV infected by Western blot (overall HIV prevalence: 0.27%, ELISA-positive predictive value: 37.7%). The subgroup prevalence of HIV and positive predictive value of ELISA were 1.53 and 75% among Caucasians; 2.43 and 82.6% among African-Americans; and 0.05 and 9.8% among Hispanics, respectively (p<0.05 for the comparisons between Hispanics and non-Hispanics only) The positive predictive value of rapid HIV-ELISA during pregnancy varies widely, depending on maternal race/ethnicity and sexual behavior. The routine disclosure of rapid intrapartum HIV serum screening results prior to Western blot confirmation should be avoided in very low-risk populations.Zacharias NM et al. High false-positive rate of HIV rapid serum screening in a predominantly hispanic prenatal population. J Perinatol. 2004 Dec;24(12):743-7.In our study we had a very high incidence of false positive HIV DNA PCR (75%) especially in younger infantsShah I. Diagnosis of perinatal transmission of HIV-1 infection by HIV DNA PCR. 2004 Oct-Dec;6(4):187-189.the not infrequent occurrence of borderline quantitative HIV RNA results can confuse the diagnostic status of the child.Parry JV et al. Towards error-free HIV diagnosis: guidelines on laboratory practice. Commun Dis Public Health. 2003 Dec;6(4):334-50.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/cdph/issues/CDPHvol6/No4/6_4guideline1.pdfAt the present time, if a newborn tests positive at birth, the baby may only be showing passive antibodies, passed along by the mother. As notted earlier, only a small percentage of infants born to HIV positive women will turn out to be infected. Infants who test positive will have their blood retested using a more sophisticated technique called PCR. The State recommends that newborns with a positive HIV test should have the first of two or three PCR tests beginning at one month of age. PCR detects small amounts of genetic material in the blood and produces a definitive HIV diagnosis by the time the infant is two months old One potential drawback to voluntary testing [why would involuntary testing be any different?] is the unknown toxicity affect AZT use can have on infants who are born without HIV [and what about the toxicity on children who will later be found to be HIV-positive?] and the pregnant women who take it. There are no long-term studies on the efficacy of AZT use on healthy children [how could AZT be effective in HIV-negative children?]. Most clinical studies have excluded women. Moreover, a report prepared by the Institute of Medicine indicated that PCP prophylaxis or antiviral therapy for those who were HIV positive but asymptomatic had serious ramifications, especially regarding toxicity Convincing pregnant women, especially African Americans, to use AZT or other anti-viral drugs may be difficult. One study showed that African American women hold disturbing views towards AZT use. For instance, some respondents said that AZT could harm them [shocking!], others said the drug was indiscriminately prescribed, while others were unwilling to use it because AZT had not been tested on women of color. A number of respondents indicated that AZT use was a way for pharmaceutical companies to make moneyCameron T. Mandatory HIV testing of newborns in New York State: what are the implications?. J Health Soc Policy. 2002;14(3):59-78.Physicians should determine whether the infant is at low, moderate, or high risk for acquiring HIV. After risk-stratification the physician may proceed with 2 PCR tests, 3 PCR tests, or PCR testing and serologic follow-up. Infants of mothers who are on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) at delivery, whose mothers have a low or undetectable viral load at delivery, and who do not breast-feed, should be considered low-risk. These low-risk infants should have 2 PCR tests, 1- and 4-months post partum. Infants whose mothers have an unknown or high viral load at delivery and who do not breast-feed should be considered moderate-risk. These infants should have 3 negative PCR tests, 1 during the first month of life, 1 after the first month of life, and 1 after 4 months of life. Infants who breastfeed should be considered high-risk and require at least 3 negative PCR tests, PCR testing every 3 months until breast-feeding stops, and serologic follow-up. Any positive PCR test requires virologic confirmation and serologic followup.Benjamin DK Jr. Integration of statistical theory and practical clinical expertise. Polymerase chain reaction testing of the HIV-exposed infant. Minerva Pediatr. 2002 Apr;54(2):105-11.The positive predictive value of a single [rapid HIV] test (i.e., the probability that a positive test represents true infection) will be low among populations with low prevalence. Therefore, a reactive rapid test must be confirmed by a supplemental test (e.g., Western blot). However, necessary peripartum interventions to reduce the risk for perinatal transmission might need to be based on the preliminary results of rapid testing at labor and delivery [i.e. its okay to give toxic antiviral drugs to babies that are uninfected]Revised Recommendations for HIV Screening of Pregnant Women. MMWR. 2001 Nov 9;50(RR19):59-86.A total of 2474 samples were obtained from 742 children and were tested at the University of North Carolina laboratory; 19 of 2472 were classified as indeterminate. The sensitivity of the test rose rapidly from 54.5% for infants who were younger than 48 hours to 75% for infants who were between 48 hours and 1 week, to greater than 95% for infants who were older than 1 month.Benjamin DK Jr et al. Rational testing of the HIV-exposed infant. Pediatrics. 2001 Jul;108(1):E3.Twenty-three (72%) of 32 symptomatic HIV-1-exposed neonates recruited at a mean of 15.2 days were HIV-1-infected [i.e. 28% of infants with AIDS symptoms with uninfected]. HIV-1 infection was detected in 5 patients who were tested within 48 h of birth, confirming congenital infection.Pillay T et al. Severe, rapidly progressive human immunodeficiency virus type 1 disease in newborns with coinfections. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2001 Apr;20(4):404-10.[the definition of HIV-uninfected in babies was] two negative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay results at 9 months or older among those either not breastfed or who had stopped breastfeeding more than 3 months before their last sampleCoutsoudis A et al. Method of feeding and transmission of HIV-1 from mothers to children by 15 months of age: prospective cohort study from Durban, South Africa. AIDS. 2001 Feb 16;15(3):379-87.Although DNA and RNA PCR and cell culture can detect very low concentrations of HIV-1, these assays yield a positive result in only 20-40% of vertically- infected infants who are tested shortly after birthDunn DT et al. Interventions to prevent vertical transmission of HIV-1: effect on viral detection rate in early infant samples. AIDS. 2000 Jul 7;14(10):1421-8.We cared for a woman initially seen because of Rhe[s]us isoimmunization who consented to routine HIV screening at 20 weeks gestation. The initial EIA result was reactive, as was the result of a repeat test 2 weeks later, at which time a supplemental EIA test (nonreactive) and Western blot analysis (indeterminate) were requested. One week later, the result of a third screening EIA test was nonreactive. A month later, another screening EIA test gave a reactive result, a supplemental EIA test result was nonreactive, and a Western blot analysis result was indeterminate for all 3 determinants of HIV-1; the patients HIV viral load was < 500 copies/mL. At 34 weeks gestation (when all results were finally to hand) the patient was reassured that she was HIV negative. Twelve weeks had passed since the first positive test result. Understandably, the patient was under considerable stress during this time We had been unaware that multiparity, multiple previous transfusions and auto-immume disorders are all risk factors for false-positive reactions (in non-pregnant populations) because of anti-HLA-DR or other antibodies. Pregnant women are often multiparous, may have a prior history of ante- or post-partum hemorrhage requiring transfusion, and belong to the gender and age groups in which auto-autoimmune phenomena are most commonMagee LA et al. False-positive results in antenatal HIV screening. CMAJ. 1999 May 4;160(9):1285.Infants were considered to be HIV-1 infected if they had detectable HIV RNA on two separate blood draws, or a reactive EIA [ELISA antibody test] and confirmed by Western blot for HIV-1 antibody at 18 months of age. Infants who had a single positive plasma HIV-1 RNA test were considered to have probable infection. Where possible, HIV culture...was also performed to confirm the HIV-1 infection in the infants...At birth, one of 22 infants was HIV-1 infected. One infant, who tested negative, died the day after birth leaving 21 evaluable infants for subsequent testing. At 6 months of age four of 21 infants were HIV-1 infected (one in cohort 1 and three in cohort 2). One of the four HIV-infected infants was initially positive for plasma HIV RNA at birth, two were initially HIV RNA positive at 6 weeks of age, and one was initially HIV RNA positive at 6 months of age. Two of the infants with positive plasma HIV RNA tests (one positive at birth and the other positive at 6 weeks of age) also had a confirmatory positive HIV culture; one infant had a confirmatory HIV RNA test. One of these four infants had a single positive plasma HIV RNA test, but died before a confirmatory test and was therefore considered as probably HIV-1 infected.Musoke P et al. A phase I/II study of the safety and pharmacokinetics of nevirapine in HIV-1-infected pregnant Ugandan women and their neonates (HIVNET 006). AIDS. 1999 Mar 11;13(4):479-86.The standard diagnostic test for HIV infection [ELISA] is based on the detection of HIV immunoglobulin class G (IgG) antibody. However, all children born to infected mothers initially test HIV antibody positive since maternal IgG antibody crosses the placenta.Dunn DT. A review of statistical methods for estimating the risk of vertical human immunodeficiency virus transmission. Int J Epidemiol. 1998 Dec;27(6):1064-7.6 (2%) specimens from uninfected children tested positive by NASBA and one specimen had an indeterminate result [four of these were blamed on lab errors, but there was no direct evidence of this] Of the 131 specimens from infected children, 106 (81%) tested positive and 25 (19%) tested negative by qualitative NASBA. Of the 106 specimens testing positive, 100 (94%) also had detectable RNA by quantitative NASBA, 5 (5%) did not, and one (1%) test was invalid The sensitivity of qualitative NASBA was 38% in the first week and 95% between 6 weeks and 3 months of life. By DNA PCR, 92 (70%) specimens from infected children tested positive, 36 (28%) tested negative, and three (2%) tested indeterminate. The sensitivity of DNA PCR was 29% in the first week and 92% between 6 weeks and 3 months of life. For 15 of the 128 specimens with definitive PCR results, qualitative NASBA results were discordant.Simonds RJ et al. Sensitivity and specificity of a qualitative RNA detection assay to diagnose HIV infection in young infants. Perinatal AIDS Collaborative Transmission Study. AIDS. 1998 Aug 20;12(12):1545-9.47 samples from uninfected children between the age of 10 days and 3 months were negative; all were initially negative by viral culture or DNA PCR on PBMC [peripheral blood mononuclear cells]. One sample was found to be repeatedly positive when it was negative by viral culture and DNA PCR on PBMC. This child was considered definitely non-infected because he was repeatedly seronegative after 18 months of age [This sounds good, but is consistent with a 2% false positive rate. In a low risk population this would mean that false positives drastically outnumber true. If the rate of HIV infection is 1/1000, there would be 1 true positive and 20 false positives for each group of 1000]Delamare C et al. HIV-1 RNA detection in plasma for the diagnosis of infection in neonates. The French Pediatric HIV Infection Study Group. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1997 Jun 1;15(2):121-5.[the results of this study include] specimens (1 each obtained during weeks 2 and 5 and month 3 of life) from [an infant] who was DNA-PCR-negative and viral RNA-negative in all tests during [the] first 5 months of life but DNA PCR-positive after age 9 months; infant remained HIV antibody-positive in year 2 (infant was not breast-fed )Steketee RW et al. Early detection of perinatal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 infection using HIV RNA amplification and detection. New York City Perinatal HIV Transmission Collaborative Study. J Infect Dis. 1997 Mar;175(3):707-11.Blood-draw specimens (108) obtained from 49 HIV-infected infants and 10 specimens from 8 uninfected infants were tested. HIV RNA and DNA-PCR positivity rates were 56% and 33%, respectively, in 36 specimens from 36 infants less than 28 days of age. Among 81 specimens obtained after age 14 days, 79 (98%) were positive by HIV RNA testing. No HIV-infected infant specimens were DNA-PCR-positive and HIV RNA-negative. All specimens from 8 uninfected infants were HIV RNA-negative [but note that the small sample size makes this study unable to detect quite high rates of false positives (e.g. 10%) and other anomalies]Steketee RW et al. Early detection of perinatal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 infection using HIV RNA amplification and detection. New York City Perinatal HIV Transmission Collaborative Study. J Infect Dis. 1997 Mar;175(3):707-11.[our studies suggest that] the result of a single PCR test is not sufficient to diagnose or exclude HIV infection and that PCR is more informative when delayed until after the first month of life. These findings also suggest that initial PCR results should be confirmed on samples drawn after a delay of a month or more. This strategy will reduce (but not eliminate) false-positive and false-negative test results. Although sequential testing will provide further evidence for or against infection, the posttest probability of disease will not increase or decrease as much as sequential application of the Bayes theorem would indicate unless test errors (false-positive and false-negative results) are independent between the tests. Sequential and combination test strategies have been evaluated recently. PCR results during the first month of life are of value primarily if the test is negative...In conclusion, our analysis confirms that although PCR is one of the most useful tests for diagnosis of HIV infection in neonates and infants, it is not definitive. Therefore, PCR should be interpreted with the aid of careful clinical follow-up examinations, preferably lasting until the HIV antibody status of the infant is resolved [usually considered to be after 18 months, although it is unlikely that most doctors would consider withholding antiretroviral therapy until that point]. The sensitivity and specificity of PCR in neonates [newborns] is lower than in older infants, which results in a low positive predictive value; however, negative tests are informative [negative test results are much more likely to be accurate than positive test results]. Delaying the use of PCR until after the neonatal period or repeating PCR on independent samples obtained 30 to 60 days later will reduce test errors [but not eliminate them]Owens DK et al. A Meta-analytic Evaluation of the Polymerase Chain Reaction for the Diagnosis of HIV Infection in Infants. JAMA. 1996 May 1;275(17):1342-1348.for 100 neonates [newborns] with positive PCR [viral load] test results...44 will prove to be uninfected. For older infants, the probability of true HIV infection after a positive PCR test result is 83% [although earlier the authors admit that there is no gold standard for evaluating the tests]Owens DK et al. A Meta-analytic Evaluation of the Polymerase Chain Reaction for the Diagnosis of HIV Infection in Infants. JAMA. 1996 May 1;275(17):1342-1348.A diagnosis of infection was based on the development of an AIDS-defining illness or seropositivity beyond 15 months of age...Incorrect and indeterminate diagnoses by various rules are summarized in table 3...In uninfected infants, misdiagnoses [false positives] were more common in rule B [positive by at least two of PCR, antibody or culture on one sample] and rule C [positive by at least two samples using one of: PCR, antibody or culture tests] with PCR...mainly because of the occurrence of false-positive PCR resultsPaul MO et al. Laboratory diagnosis of infection status in infants perinatally exposed to human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Infect Dis. 1996 Jan;173(1):68-76.Most infected infants lack specific signs, symptoms or characteristic laboratory abnormalities at birth that distinguish them from uninfected seropositive infants...[In this study] Group 1 consisted of 105 subjects confirmed to be infected as documented by the presence of at least two of the following: positive HIV culture, persistent antibody after 15 months of age, positive p24 antigen, or the presence of AIDS as defined by the CDC surveillance definition...Overall, 96 of 105 initial PCRs in infected subjects were positive [4 of the false positive PCR occurred during the first week of life, but the other 5 occurred in children more than 1 year old]Nelson RP et al. Diagnosis of pediatric human immunodeficiency virus infection by means of a commercially available polymerase chain reaction gene amplification. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1996 Jan;150:40-5.Kovacs A et al. Comparison of a rapid nonisotopic polymerase chain reaction assay with four commonly used methods for the early diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection in neonates and children. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1995 Nov;14(11):948-54.Data were available on 271 HIV-infected children [in 12 different studies] At the initial assessment, 175 children tested PCR-positive All children who initially tested negative subsequently tested PCR-positive An estimated 38% of infected children tested on the day of birth or day after birth are PCR-positive At 28 days the estimated sensitivity was 96% 7 children had negative test results between 65 and 183 days. As information was not sought on children who were subsequently found to be HIV-uninfected, conclusions about the specificity of PCR cannot be drawn.Dunn DT et al. The sensitivity of HIV-1 DNA polymerase chain reaction in the neonatal period and the relative contributions of intra-uterine and intra-partum transmission. AIDS. 1995 Sep;9(9):F7-11.3 uninfected infants [out of 14] have had one abnormal laboratory test (virus isolated at age 3 weeks and low levels of HIV antigen in two at ages 1 and 9 months, respectively). A fourth uninfected infant had a weak positive result by HIV-1 polymerase chain reaction assay at age 3 months, and virus was isolated [i.e. cell culture, not isolation] at 12 months. These children have had multiple negative tests subsequently, are now 3.7, 6.8, 3.5 and 2.5 years old, respectively, and remain well. 2 infected infants are symptomatic (CDC class P-2A [mildly symptomatic, moderate immune suppression, this is not AIDS]). The third, a breast-fed infant, seroconverted at about 5 months of age, on the basis of the appear of and subsequent rise in HIV p24 antigen levels and HIV antibody titers; he remains asymptomaticPalasanthiran P et al. Decay of transplacental human immunodeficiency virus type 1 antibodies in neonates and infants. J Infect Dis. 1994 Dec;170(6):1593-6.HIV-1-specific CTL [cyto-toxic/cell-killing lymphocyte] activity in PBMC [peripheral blood mononuclear cells] could be evaluated in 23 children [out of 42 originally in the study] All children had seroreverted [gone from HIV-positive to HIV-negative] at the time of the study, and no HIV-1 proviral DNA had been detected in their PBMC The presence of CTL indicates that the subjects were exposed to HIV-1 or its products. It is unclear whether infection actually occurred, since no evidence of HIV-1 proviral DNA could be detected Furthermore, all subjects remained seronegative the presence of HIV-1-specific CTL is certainly suggestive that some degree of viral replication had occurred and was successfully contained and cleared by this HIV-1-specific immune response.De Maria A, Cirillo C, Moretta L. Occurrence of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-specific cytolytic T cell activity in apparently uninfected children born to HIV-1-infected mothers. J Infect Dis. 1994 Nov;170(5):1296-9.The probability of having a positive PCR [Polymerase Chain Reaction or viral load test] among  children with unequivocal evidence of infection, was 30.5% on cord blood and 80.6% at 3 months Among 117 HIV-1-uninfected children born to HIV-1-infected mothers, 6 (5%) had a false-positive PCR on cord blood [after excluding 6(5%) of the samples because of the possibility of maternal blood contamination] an estimate of the specificity of our PCR technique applied to the diagnosis of perinatal HIV-1 infection is 98.0% our study showed also that cord blood is probably not suitable for early diagnosis of HIV-1 infection in newborns because a probable contamination of the newborn blood sample by maternal blood was observed in 6 of 117 cord blood samples from newborns further shown to be uninfected.Simonon A et al. An assessment of the timing of mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 by means of polymerase chain reaction. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1994; 7(9):952-7.The results of this work indicate that certain anti-HIV antibodies cross-react with endogenous placental proteins. Anti-gp120/160 was generally reactive with villus cytotrophoblast cells from second trimester placenta and with limited regions of syncytium in third trimester placental tissue samples. Reactivity was mostly cytoplasmic, although some extravillus trophoblast cells stained in a manner suggesting surface membrane-related expression. This was also the case with anti-p17 staining of extravillus trophoblast. In villus placental tissue sections from the second and third trimester, anti-p17 reactivity was strongly associated with the cytotrophoblast layer. Limited syncytial areas also displayed an apical band of reactivity. These data demonstrate that HIV-1 cross-reactive protein epitopes are expressed within trophoblast of normal human placentae. In additional studies, it was observed that placental ERV particle isolates are cross-reactive with these antibodies and that these antibodies also cross-react with human choriocarcinoma cell lines BeWo, JAr, and JEG-3 that are not infected with HIV-1 (data not shown). These data suggest that human placental endogenous retroviral proteins may have antigenic similarity with exogenous HIV-1 and that expression of these proteins is a normal feature of trophoblast differentiation.Lyden TW et al. Anti-HIV monoclonal antibodies cross-react with normal human trophoblast. Placenta. 1994;15(Suppl 1):19-32.potential causes of indeterminate Western blots for HIV-1...included...HLA antibody cross-reactivity, and current pregnancy...All but one of the cases who demonstrated anti-class I HLA reactivity were multiparous women [pregnant more than once]Celum CL et al. Risk factors for repeatedly reactive HIV-1 EIA and indeterminate Western blots: a population-based case control study. Arch Intern Med. 1994 May 23;154:1129-37.Some of the large cohort studies of children born to infected mothers have identified a small population (2.5-4.7%) of seronegative children in whom viral markers have been or continue to be positive. The longterm outlook of such children is unknown, but studies suggest that they have a good prognosis.Rowland-Jones SL et al. HIV-specific cytotoxic T-cell activity in an HIV-exposed but uninfected infant. Lancet. 1993 Apr 3;341(8849):860-1.An infant was considered to be infected if anti-HIV-1 antibodies persisted beyond 18 months of age or if the infant died of AIDS [although all AIDS-defining diseases can occur without HIV, so at least some of these deaths could be unrelated to HIV infection]...60 of the 162 infants with negative cultures at birth were retested before the age of 3 months, and 11 were positive...Of the 181 infants tested for HIV p24 antigen at birth, 7 were positive...Of the 174 infants negative for p24 antigen at birth, 81 were tested again before the age of three months, and 4 were positiveBurgard M et al. The use of viral culture and p24 antigen testing to diagnose human immunodeficiency virus infection in neonates. N Engl J Med. 1992 Oct 22;327(17):1192-7.[HIV co-culture] was positive in 32 of 41 (78%) [HIV-positive] childrenKind C et al. Epidemiology of vertically transmitted HIV-1 infection in Switzerland: results of a nationwide prospective study. Eur J Pediatr. 1992;151:442-8.In 1990, of 20.2 million HIV tests done in Russia only 112 were confirmed and about 20,000 were false positives, 1991 saw some 30,000 false positives out of 29.4 million tests, with only 66 confirmations...in 1991 alone some 8000 false-positive results were reported in pregnant women, with only 6 confirmations [presumably with the Western Blot test]Voevodin A. HIV screening in Russia. Lancet. 1992;339:1548.At birth, 5 babies had a positive PCR...and 3 of them had detectable p24 antigenaemia...Among the 45 babies who were negative by PCR, 20 were tested by HIV culture and all were negative. By 4-9 weeks of age, 16 infants had a positive PCR; 13 with the three primer sets, and 3 with two primer sets. HIV culture could be done in 14 of these cases and was positive in 11, negative in 1, and indeterminate in 2...By the age of 5-9 months...34 children previously found negative and 10 the 16 found positive [were retested]. The results remained unchanged for PCR, and culture was positive in the 2 children who had indeterminate results at 4-9 weeks. In addition, p24 antigenaemia became positive in 1 child previously found infected...The negative results obtained at birth by PCR and culture indicate that the viral load in PBMC is not sufficient to be detected.Krivine A et al. HIV replication during the first few weeks of life. Lancet. 1992 May 16;339(8803):1187-9.4 children who became seronegative but who were repeatedly virus [culture] positive were excluded from the analysisEuropean Collaborative Study. Risk factors for mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1. Lancet. 1992 Apr 25;339:1007-12.PCR performed before the age of 1 month identified only 55% of the truly infected infantsVan de Perre P et al. Postnatal transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus 1 from mother to infant: a prospective cohort study in Kigali, Rwanda. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:593-8.The presence of anti-HIV antibodies [in young children] is not a useful marker of infection because of the passive transmission of maternal antibodies, which may persist for several months...up to 15 months. Tests for p24 antigen are often negative in newborns and therefore are not helpful for diagnosis. Moreover, it has been reported that some children could remain seronegative...[In this study of 24 newborns and young children] HIV was isolated [sic] from PBMC [Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell] cultures in 8 of the 24 cases studied...16/24 harbored HIV DNA sequences in their PBMCs using PCR...HIV RNA sequences were amplified using gag primers in cells from 10 [out of the 24, 20 were eventually defined as HIV-positive by antibodies after 15 months]...[in summary] 67% of newborns were found to be infected by HIV using PCREscaich S et al. Comparison of HIV detection by virus isolation in lymphocyte cultures and molecular amplification of HIV DNA and RNA by PCR in offspring of seropositive mothers. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1991;4(2):130-5.Infants were defined as infected by a positive [i.e. p24 antigen present] HIV-1 culture or by increasing anti-p24 or gp41/gp120 antibody titers after delivery...Infants were defined as not infected if HIV-1 cultures were negative, a sequential decline or loss of antibody to both p24 and gp41/gp120 proteins was measured, and immunoglobulin levels and T lymphocyte subset counts were comparable to those of control infants [no word on whether some infants were indeterminate, or whether all were arbitrarily placed in one category or the other]Hutto C et al. A hospital-based prospective study of perinatal infection with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Pediatr. 1991 Mar;118(3):347-53.A recent analysis of several published studies involving 172 infants of seropositive mothers concluded that the sensitivity [of DNA PCR (viral load)] in the newborn period (0-30 days) was around 55%, and in all infected children was only 73%Tudor-Williams G. Early diagnosis of vertically acquired HIV-1 infection. AIDS. 1991 Jan;5(1):103-5.Among the 8 newborns born to HIV1-infected mothers, 6 had detectable HIV1 DNA sequences In group II [babies], 17 of 23 sera were available HIV1 DNA was detected in PBL [peripheral blood leukocytes] of 14 of 23 babies. Among the 14 babies positive by PCR, 10 had positive or incomplete and 2 had negative Western blots. Among the nine babies negative by PCR, 3 had positive or incomplete and two had negative Western blots. Therefore, 2 of 4 babies, who were seronegative at the time of PCR test, had HIV1 DNA in PBL 8 (including the 4 with symptoms consistent with AIDS) of the 14 HIV1 DNA-positive and 1 of 9 HIV DNA-negative babies had clinical features likely to be related to HIV infection. The results obtained with the three sets of primers markedly differed; indeed 7 of 31 samples yielded positive results with all three sets of primers as compared to 7 of 31 which were positive with two sets of primers but negative with the third, and the remaining six of 31 samples were only positive with one set.Paterlini P et al. Polymerase chain reaction for studies of mother to child transmission of HIV1 in Africa. J Med Virol. 1990 Jan;30(1):53-7.Of 1954 women screened at delivery, 12% were seropositive for HIV-1...At labour none of the 109 seropositive mothers for whom follow up was possible had AIDS...during two years of follow up, 4% developed AIDS, 28% had AIDS related complex, 46% had generalized lymphadenopathy, and the remaining 25% had no symptoms...Of 61 children who became seronegative at 8 months, antibodies to HIV-1 reappeared in nine at 12 months. By comparison none of of the nine children who became seronegative at 12 months showed a reappearance of antibodies. On the other hand, 18% of children who were seropositive up to 12 months became negative at 18 months and were free of symptoms after 24 months...of 13 neonates who were seronegative at birth, four converted to become seropositive at different ages...HIV-1 serology is unreliable among children under 18 months of lifeHira SK et al. Perinatal transmission of HIV-1 in Zambia. BMJ. 1989 Nov 18;299(6710):1250-2.The detection of conventional IgG antibodies to HIV-1 during the first year of life may result from the passive transfer of maternal antibodies...Our inability to detect these antibodies in 10 of the 11 infants who were without evidence of AIDS in the first year of life but who had positive cord-blood cultures highlights the difficulty of diagnosing perinatal HIV-1 infection. The absence of detectable antibodies in children with obvious clinical disease has also been noted in previous studiesRyder RW et al. Perinatal Transmission of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 to Infants of Seropositive Women in Zaire. N Engl J Med. 1989 Jun 22;320(25):1637-42.30 of the infants born to seropositive mothers reverted from seropositive to seronegative. The median age of these 30 infants at seroreversion...was 9 months (range 1 to 16) HIV proviral sequences were detected in 1 or more serum specimens obtained during the postnatal period from all of the 6 infants tested who later had AIDS and from 4 of the 14 infants who had nonspecific findings proviral [HIV] sequences [of DNA] were detected in 9 of the 10 infants tested whose illness met the CDC case definition for HIV infection, this definition includes infants with AIDS, positive culture, positive serum antigen [p24] test, or persistent antibody beyond 15 months of age. In addition, proviral sequences were detected in one infant with nonspecific findings who was negative on culture and serum antigen testing and less than 15 months of ageRogers MF et al. Use of the polymerase chain reaction for early detection of the proviral sequences of human immunodeficiency virus in infants born to seropositive mothers. N Engl J Med. 1989 Jun 22;320(25):1649-54.In four of five infants who had signs or symptoms of HIV infection after becoming seronegative, we detected evidence of HIV infection with use of hybridization studies carried out after the genome was amplified with the polymerase-chain-reaction method. One infant who became seronegative was totally free of symptoms but carried the HIV genomeBlanche S et al. A prospective study of infants born to women seropositive for human immunodeficiency virus type 1. N Engl J Med. 1989 Jun 22;320(25):1643-8.9 infants (8%) were [HIV] seronegative [at 18 months] but had persistent or transient clinical signs [of HIV infection] In 4 of 5 infants who had signs or symptoms of HIV infection after becoming seronegative, we detected evidence of HIV infection with use of hybridization studies carried out after the genome was amplified with the PCR method. 1 infant who became seronegative was totally free of symptoms but carried the HIV genomeBlanche S et al. A prospective study of infants born to women seropositive for human immunodeficiency virus type 1. N Engl J Med. 1989 Jun 22;320(25):1643-8.Infection was defined by persistence of antibody...beyond the age of 15 months, clinical AIDS or AIDS-related complex (ARC), or the presence of virus [actually culture] or p24 antigen...[but]...53% [of children HIV-antibody-positive at birth] lost antibody by 1 year. By 15 months, 69% would be expected to have lost antibody...6 [of 107 eventually determined to be HIV-negative] have lost antibody after 15 months; one had been antibody positive at 18.1 months...No child has lost antibody and then become, and remained, antibody-positiveEuropean Collaborative Study. Mother to child transmission of HIV infection. Lancet. 1988 Nov 5;2:1039-43.Of 85 children with human-immuno-deficiency-virus (HIV) infection based on clinical (opportunistic infection), epidemiological (mother a drug addict or known to be HIV infected), and immunological (helper-T-cell deficiency and impaired proliferative response to pokeweed mitogen) features, 9 were found to lack antibody to HIV as measured by a commercial enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA). All 9 children had detectable levels of HIV antigen in simultaneous plasma specimens, measured by a sensitive antigen-capture ELISA. The use of the western blot assay and an ELISA with recombinant HIV antigens was able to identify HIV infection in 4 of the 9 children.Borkowsky W et al. Human-immunodeficiency-virus infections in infants negative for anti-HIV by enzyme-linked immunoassay. Lancet. 1987 May 23;1(8543):1168-71.IgM [Immunoglobulin M] antibodies were present in 4 [of 27] children who were aged over 3 months. These antibodies were found only against p41, p55 and p31 viral antigens but not against p120, p24 and p15. These patterns were completely different from their mothers or those of 30% of adult patients recently infected with persistent lymphadenopathy who had anti-HIV IgMGaetano C et al. Delayed and defective anti-HIV IgM response in infants. Lancet. 1987 Mar 14;1(8533):631.Our limited study shows that the prevalence of seropositivity in children aged 6 months, when all the maternal antibodies should have disappeared, is 50%. Caesarean section does not seem to protect the fetus from infection, as has been suggested by one author and later refuted by the Center for Disease Control.Semprini AE et al. HIV infection and AIDS in newborn babies of mothers positive for HIV antibody. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1987 Mar 7;294(6572):610.We have seen an infant, born to seropositive parents, who was persistently seronegative for HIV antibody before the onset of severe immunodeficiency..The diagnosis of AIDS in this child rests on the opportunistic infections, decreased T4/T8 [immune cell] ratios, impaired T-cell immunity, loss of functional antibody, and seropositivity in the parentsMarshall GS et al. AIDS in a child without antibody to HIV. Lancet. 1987 Feb 21;1(8530):446-7.In neonates, presence of antibodies to HIV-1 is indicative of exposure to HIV-1, but not necessarily of HIV-1 infection, due to the acquisition of maternal antibodies which persist for up to 6 months.SUDS HIV-1 test. Murex.
There you have it. No handful of wild-eyed conspiracy theorists. No right-wing racists, as the Aids industrys spinmeisters would have you believe. Just 19 very serious, concerned, highly educated people from every corner of the globe who sense that an enormous tragedy is unfolding due to the medical establishments unwillingness to face the evidence that the Hiv-Aids theory is a mistake.
The people on this page were intellectually curious enough to have sought out and studied the arguments that discredit the Hiv-Aids theory. Since the mass media and professional journals censor these arguments, the vast majority of doctors and scientists, although decent people who want to do the right thing, have never been exposed to them, and so accept the biased conclusions of politicized bureaucracies like the CDC and WHO, whose coziness with the drug industry is legendary and whose recommendations always seems to dovetail perfectly with drug industry marketing plans.
Were it not for the massive media blackout of information that contradicts the Hiv theory, many more people would be asking tough questions.
The next time you hear the media say, only a handful of scientists doubt Hivs role in Aids, refer them to this page. Explain to them that it is wrong to misrepresent the fact that there is enormous dissent to the Hiv-Aids paradigm.
The next time you hear the media drone, Hiv, the virus that causes Aids, remind them that journalists are supposed to distinguish between what is a theory and what is a fact. That Hiv-Aids is only a theory and has never been proven, is admitted by top scientists even in the Aids establishment.
The next time the media announce that tens of millions of people are dying from Hiv in Africa, ask them how they know that. Remind them that journalists are supposed to question dubious assertions from powerful, drug-industry funded agencies like the WHO, not parrot them as if they were indisputable. Ask them why they report these numbers as if they were actual Aids cases, when in fact they are projections made by WHOs computer programs, based on very questionable statistical methodologies and contradicted by many facts including the continual large population increases experienced in the countries supposedly worst affected.
Request that the media stop twisting the truth in support of a politicized, entrenched Aids establishment that profits financially by terrorizing people, pokes its nose shamelessly into peoples private sex lives, compels people to submit to inaccurate tests and literally forces mothers and babies to swallow toxic, unproven chemotherapy drugs with horrific, often-fatal side effects.
Explain to them that this is irresponsible, and that such actions cause needless anxiety, shatter peoples lives, tear families apart, destroy hope and trigger countless suicides. And that while we realize that sensational headlines about killer viruses sell newspapers, the social cost of these profits is unacceptable.
Make the media understand that keeping people in the dark about the large number of credentialed dissenters to the Hiv-Aids dogmas, and the financial conflicts of interest that are rampant among Hiv-Aids scientists and NGOs, is a violation of everyones human right to informed consent and freedom of information.
Note: Affiliation with an organization does not imply that the organization supports the individual HIV/AIDS skeptics position.
Does Hiv cause Aids? Lots of scientists say no. Read more.
Alive And Well
Dr. Peter Duesberg
The Perth Group
Treatment Information Group
Immunity Resource Foundation
Alberta Reappraising Aids Society
Last updated January 29, 2013.