Of course AIDS is not a distinct disease: the acronym describes a syndrome relating to deficiencies in immunity to other diseases. So AIDS has now become an 'umbrella term' of an ever-growing collection of diseases that have a long history in humans. It is financially convenient to include more and more diseases under the umbrella of AIDS.
Many groups, looking for grants to fund work in battling many of the diseases common to third-world countries, find that using the term AIDS in their proposals is much more likely to garner financial support. Also the pharmaceutical industry has many more opportunities to sell their anti-retroviral drugs, such as AZT, if HIV/AIDS is given as the cause.
AZT was originally developed as an anti-cancer drug but was never given FDA approval because of its highly toxic nature. So the invention of the HIV and AIDS connection opened up a whole new opportunity for the drug.
Unfortunately, those diagnosed with an HIV infection and/or AIDS get these highly toxic (and immunosuppressive drugs) which, more than likely, causes the fatal immune deficiency blamed on HIV and called AIDS!
mediasorcery wrote:The big pharma are lying out there arse about aids, check this out[link] they want everyone on drugs, even if you dont have it, someone post it up, i dont know how=[please,thanx]
I think this is just another disinfo vid along side with zeitgeist and the 911 truth movement, they dont really touch upon the real questions, who planted it in the first place, why they target homersexuals and african people.
- Related topics
- Last post