Saturday, December 13, 2014

24. An In-Depth Look At (So-called) "VIRAL LOAD" Reveals That It's A Fraud

(So-called) "VIRAL LOAD" -- The Facts   

By Richard Jannaccio on Monday, July 21, 2014 at 7:03pm

Richard Jannaccio


THE KEY TO UNDERSTANDING WHAT "VIRAL LOAD" REALLY IS, is to know the procedure by which this number is obtained. It is, after all, a number But ....

ONCE YOU KNOW WHERE THE VIRAL LOAD NUMBERS COME FROM, NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO FOOL YOU INTO BELIEVING THAT THIS IS YOUR VIRAL LOAD.

This first video gives you part of the procedure in detail. It's slightly different for HIV, but it only means using a different enzyme in the first step, and they mention that at the end,

The second video I'm including mostly because it shows very graphically at the end how a few molecules can multiply into millions or billions using this magnification procedure that increases the number of molecules exponentially after each cycle. The problem with its use in HIV is that people are told that the number of copies of DNA produced in the lab is their viral load -- YET THIS IS NOT WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THEIR BLOOD. It is produced outside of your body by adding chemicals to your blood. So what it tells you is how well a biochemical procedure works using your blood. Your blood provides bits of nucleic acid, to which is added  enzymes, nucleic acid building blocks, and other chemicals, which is incubated at various temperatures during different steps, the cycle is repeated over and over, after which an estimate --not even a count-- is made of how many copies of these nucleic acids were made. It is assumed but never proven that these are HIV nucleic acids. And you are given the number and lead to believe that this is your "viral load." No. It is the test tube's viral load. Because that's the only place it is. it is not in the blood that is circulating in your body.

Yes, such deception is astounding. Unfortunately, deception is a hallmark of the HIV/AIDS Industry's tests, diagnoses, and remedies.

The third video is specific for HIV, but it is less detailed in the procedure, focuses on related issues, and contains errors. That's OK, we'll correct the errors.

Next, a discussion with Liam Scheff.

Finally, a discussion with Dr. Rodney Richards. The podcast with Dr. Richards, interviewed by David Crowe and Christine Maggiore, covers all of the tests and is well worth listening to, but if you want to fast-forward to the viral load part, it begins near the end, at 40:00 minutes into the show. Dr. Richards is a chemist and expert on so-called HIV tests.

I'm sorry to say I could not find a single source that had all of the important information. So, together, we'll use these and piece together the useful parts. Please have a look, and we'll analyze all of this below.

Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) - Multi-Lingual Captions:
This short animation introduces the real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedure. Captions are available multiple...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmlLj1aLZ7s

    • HERE ARE THE STEPS OF THE SO-CALLED "VIRAL LOAD" TEST:
    • 1. THEY TAKE YOUR BLOOD. 
    • 2. THEY SPIN IT IN A CENTRIFUGE SO ALL THE BLOOD CELLS SETTLE AT THE BOTTOM, AND THE TRANSPARENT SERUM IS ON TOP. THEY ONLY NEED THE SERUM, WHICH CONTAINS PROTEINS, NUCLEIC ACIDS, SUGAR, VARIOUS METABOLITES, ETC. THEY ASSUME THAT SOME OF THE RNA CHAINS ARE FROM HIV, BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, THE BLOOD CAME FROM SOMEONE WHO TESTED "POSITIVE." NEVER IN 30 YEARS HAVE THEY BOTHERED TO PROVE THAT ANYTHING IN THE SERUM CAME FROM HIV. IT IS ASSUMED. 
    • 3. ISOLATE RNA PRESUMED TO BE FROM HIV. IGNORE THE POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD BE ENDOGENOUS (THAT IS, YOUR OWN RNA). ADD BUILDING BLOCKS (NUCLEOTIDES), PRIMERS, AND REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE IN A BUFFERED SOLUTION WITH OTHER NEEDED CHEMICALS (SUCH AS MAGNESIUM) AT THE APPROPRIATE TEMPERATURE AND PH. THIS ENABLES THE RNA TO PRODUCE DNA. 
    • 4. THE DNA IS PUT THROUGH NUMEROUS CYCLES OF DUPLICATION IN THE PRESENCE OF BUILDING BLOCKS, PRIMERS, AND A POLYMERASE (ENZYME). 
    • 5. VARIOUS "TAGS" CAN BE ATTACHED TO ALLOW THESE MOLECULES TO BE "SEEN" BY LAB INSTRUMENTS THAT GIVE A NUMERICAL READING FROM WHICH THE CONCENTRATION (NUMBER OF MOLECULES PER MILLILITER) IS CALCULATED.  
    • 6. THE RESULT IS A NUMBER THAT THEY CALL VIRAL LOAD. IT IS NOT VIRAL LOAD. IT IS THE NUMBER OF SELECTED RNA MOLECULES, COPIED AFTER REPEATED COPYING CYCLES IN THE LABORATORY. THE ORIGINAL MOLECULES CAME FROM BLOOD WHERE THEY WERE PRESENT IN UNDETECTABLE LEVELS AND OF UNDETERMINED (CELL? VIRAL?) ORIGIN. 
    • THE REPORTED CONCENTRATION OF RNA MOLECULES OF THIS TYPE DOES NOT EXIST IN ANYONE'S BLOOD, ONLY IN THE LABORATORY AFTER AN EXTREME DUPLICATING PROCEDURE UNSEEN IN NATURE. 
    • WHAT DOES THIS REALLY TELL YOU? MOSTLY IT TELLS YOU HOW WELL OR HOW POORLY THE LAB PROCEDURE WORKED THAT DAY TO MAKE COPIES OF THE CHOSEN MOLECULE. IF YOU'RE TAKING ARVS, OF COURSE IT SHOULD HARDLY BE SURPRISING TO SEE FEWER NUCLEIC ACID MOLECULES IN YOUR BLOOD. BECAUSE ARVS PREVENT NUCLEIC ACID SYNTHESIS! 
    • ____________________________________________________________________________
    •  
    • SO HERE'S THE STRATEGY: THEY TAKE YOUR BLOOD AND MEASURE THE NUMBER OF COPIES OF DNA THAT THEY CAN PRODUCE IN THE LAB FROM RNA SEGMENTS TAKEN FROM YOUR BLOOD. THEN THEY PRESCRIBE NUCLEIC ACID CHAIN TERMINATORS. THEN THEY RETEST. GUESS WHAT? FEWER NUCLEIC ACID COPIES CAN BE MADE FROM YOUR BLOOD.  MAGIC! THEY CALL THIS "VIRAL LOAD" AND TELL YOU THE DRUGS ARE WORKING! BUT NO ONE HAS PROVEN THAT THESE SO-CALLED "VIRAL LOAD" NUMBERS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANY VIRUS OR RETROVIRUS, AND IF YOU READ ABOVE HOW THE PROCEDURE WORKS, YOU KNOW THAT THIS NUMBER THEY TELL YOU HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "LOAD" THAT'S INSIDE YOUR BODY. INSIDE YOUR BODY, YOURS AND EVERYBODY'S TRUE VIRAL LOAD IS ALWAYS UNDETECTABLE FOR HIV.

    • COULD PCR BE MORE USEFUL? PERHAPS WITH MORE RESEARCH AND LESS GUESSWORK, BUT NOT THE WAY IT'S BEING DONE, WHICH IS AS AN INAPPROPRIATE ADAPTATION OF A GENE MANUFACTURING TOOL. WITHOUT PURIFIED VIRUS TO KNOW THAT YOU ARE DEALING WITH HIV GENES, THIS PROCEDURE IS TOTALLY UNSCIENTIFIC, BASED WHOLLY ON ASSUMPTIONS AND LEAPS OF FAITH.
    •  *************************************************************************************************************************
    •  A MOST SOBERING QUOTE:
    • "A chief problem with gauging viral load for an individual is the large margin of error in the original estimate of the quantity of pathogen, on which the amplification formula is based. The efficiency of PCR must be perfect or the error through amplification can be exponentially increased to forty or fifty times (Craddock 1996).  Mainstream literature concedes that overestimates of infectious virus have occurred by a factor of at least sixty thousand (Piatak et al. 1993).  In the Piatak paper, one-half of the patients that were detected as having a viral load showed no evidence of virus by culture."
      Source: http://rethinkingaids.com/.../HIVM612...pp105-106
    • Richard Jannaccio: Viral load measurements are determined by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), but again, as long as HIV has not been demonstrated to exist living in blood, these PCR tests cannot be calibrated for HIV—and they cannot be used to measure “HIV viral load’. 
    • "Heinz Ludwig Sänger, a professor of molecular biology who was awarded the renowned Robert Koch prize in 1978, is one of several researchers who shares the view that “HIV has never been isolated, for which reason its nucleic acids cannot be used in PCR virus load tests as the standard for giving evidence of HIV.” Studies also confirm that PCR tests are worthless in AIDS diagnosis, as published in Annals of Internal Medicine (1994). More recent work published in 2006 in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association involved 28,000 positively tested people using the viral load tests, the established means of testing for AIDS since 1996, and concluded that viral load measures failed in more than 90 percent of the cases to predict or to explain the immune states of the subject.   http://rethinkingaids.com/.../HIVM612... pp137-138
    • “Many times, with huge viral loads in the millions, they can’t find any infectious [live] virus,” said Dr. David Rasnick.
      http://rethinkingaids.com/.../HIVM612...p152
    •  ************************************************************************************************************************

    • Results of the viral load test cannot be reproduced. This can be seen in the wide range of variability that is accepted in the quality controls set by the companies that make and commercialize the test kits. For example, Roche accepts low control having a variability between 880 and 7,900 copies per ml [Lot # 0034], and high control having a variability between 79,000 and 710,000 copies per ml [Lot # 0041] [Roche, Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor test Lot # 88618, expiration January 1999]. Most important of all, the problems with the lack of a gold standard for HIV infection also apply to the evaluation of the accuracy of the PCR or Viral load test (38,67,68). As a consequence, the specificity of the Viral load test for HIV has never been defined properly. Therefore, all viral load positive results are likewise potential false-positives for HIV.  http://rethinkingaids.com/.../HIVM612... p168 **********************************************************************************************************************
    • Since the viral load results are given in copies per ml of plasma (61) AIDS researchers, health care professionals, and lay people may think that they represent copies or counts of the virus itself (38,62-67). However, the Viral load test only makes copies of fragments of nucleic acids. It does not count HIV itself. A positive viral load test cannot be regarded as signifying the presence of the whole HIV genome, and therefore the test cannot be used to measure virus. 
    • Richard Jannaccio "Without purification of HIV it is obviously impossible to know what the RNA of HIV is, and therefore, it cannot be known whether Viral Load tests are detecting HIV or something else."
      http://rethinkingaids.com/.../HIVM612... p337
    What viral load DOES NOT mean, but what the AIDS Industry wants everybody to think it means...

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    Below is an example of INACCURATE information being spread by someone who says he's a doctor.

      NOTE: MUCH OF THE INFO IN THESE NEXT 2 VIDEOS  IS FALSE AND THESE 2 SHORT VIDEOS ARE INCLUDED HERE BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT YOU MAY HEAR FROM YOUR DOCTOR

     HIV FAQ: What does viral load mean?
    http://thehealthybear.com/hiv-faq/#VIRAL-LOAD 
    This is what you will hear on this 28-second video:
    "Viral load is a measure of how much HIV virus can be found in the blood. Modern HIV treatments are very effective at reducing nucleic acid synthesis, so the nucleic acids that are in the blood will be fewer and abnormal, having been prematurely terminated. Hence, when these are taken from a blood sample, they will not produce much product in the so-called "viral load" procedure. This drug effect results in a lower number and is interpreted as a good thing because it is assumed that a higher number is due to the presence of virus."

    •   DISCUSSION
      This doctor packs a lot of lies into 28 seconds. Let's take a look, sentence by sentence:
      1. He says: "Viral load means the amount of HIV virus that can be found in the blood."
      FACT: What they call "viral load" (to fool us) is the number of copies of pieces of DNA that they can make in the lab, using your serum and a group of lab procedures, and claiming (without proof) the these pieces of DNA were made using RNA in your blood that originally came from HIV. But, again, there is no proof that this RNA came from HIV, and the number of copies is the number of copies MADE IN THE LABORATORY, not the number in your blood. The RNA chains are UNDETECTABLE in blood and HIV is NOWHERE to be found.

    • 2. He says: "The higher the amount of virus within the blood, the higher the chance of its effect on the immune system."
    • FACT: The existence of "the virus" has never been proven and it has never been directly detected in blood, but assumed to be there due to nonspecific reverse transcriptase enzyme activity that could have nothing to do with HIV. It has been claimed but never been proven that HIV affects the immune system or causes ANY kind of disease whatsoever. Also, the implication is that the "viral load" has something to do with "virus within the blood" but that, too, has not been proven, only assumed, for more than 30 years.

    • 3. He says: "Currently the medications used to treat HIV are becoming more and more effective at reducing the amount of virus that can be found in the blood."

      FACT: Drugs or no drugs, not a single HIV has been found in anyone's blood so far.
      Bottom Line: VIRAL LOAD IS NOT VIRAL LOAD. When you look at the procedure by which "viral load" is determined, it is quite clear that "viral load" is a fraud.
    Next, this same guy does another video in which he asserts that even if there's no way to detect the virus, it's "likely" still there. Is there any evidence at all to support that claim. He admits there is none, but asserts the fact and expects us to believe it.
    FAQ: Does "undetectable viral load" mean that the HIV virus (sic) is gone?

    Of course not, according to this guy. It's still there even if there's no way to prove it, even with the fake tests. People actually will believe this at face value because 1) it comes from an authority figure and 2) it is repeated over and over, so, it must be true.

     These are examples of the misinformation that is fed to the public as fact, but there is no convincing evidence to back it up.

     PLEASE DONATE! (upper right column)


    Copyright 2014 By Richard Jannaccio
    Posted by at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment

    Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

    Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)