AIDS in Africa is spread by unsafe vaccinations, not by sex

April 26, 2011

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Studies have looked at the proportion of infections in Sub-Saharan Africa that

are caused by sexual contact. I quote as following:

A basic assumption adopted by the investigators was that all HIV infections

resulted from heterosexual transmission, so no effort was made to determine the

source of the infections discovered during the trial. There is strong evidence

that this assumption was not valid.

In the South African trial, men who reported at least one episode of

unprotected sex accounted for 2498 person-years and 46 HIV infections during the

trial. Among the remaining men, who accounted for 2076 person-years, 23 become

infected although they either had no sexual contact or always used a condom.

These men, who had infection rate of 1.11/100 person-years (95%CI=0.74-1.67),

presumably became infected through non-sexual means. The men at sexual risk of

infection had an infection rate of 1.84/100 person-years (95%CI=1.38-2.46). It

would be expected that all men in the trial shared the same baseline risk of

non-sexual transmission and any additional risk could be attributed to sexual

transmission. The infections attributed to sexual contact would be the

difference between the total rate and the non-sexually transmitted rate

(0.73/100 person-years). Consequently, only 18 (0.0073 infections per

person-year * 2498 person-years) of the 69 infections in the South African trial

can be attributed to sexual transmission.[Link]

Condoms don't work to prevent HIV infection:

Similarly, in the Ugandan trial, men who consistently used condoms had the

same rate of infection as those who never used condoms (Consistent condom use:

1.03/100 person-years; No condom use 0.91/100 person-years; RR=1.13,

95%CI=0.54-2.38, P=0.74). Men who reported no sexual partners for the duration

of the trial accounted for 1252.1 patient-years and 6 infections (0.48/100

persons-years, 95%CI=0.22-1.07). If this rate is subtracted from the rate in

sexually active men, at most 35 of the 67 infections in the Ugandan trial can be

attributed to sexual transmission.[Link]

People in Sub-Saharan Africa on average have less promiscuous sex than people in

Europe:

Epidemiologists who design computer models to support heterosexual

transmission's role in fuelling Africa's HIV epidemic characteristically choose

and/or adjust assumptions about sexual behaviour, rates of heterosexual

transmission, and/or other parameters to allow the model to reproduce observed

prevalence35± 38. These assumptions are often distant from empiric observations

from African studies. While such models show that it is possible to imagine

patterns of heterosexual transmission that can `explain' the epidemic, they do

not show that imagined patterns are realistic.

In one model, for example, and colleagues assumed a mean rate of

annual partner change of 3.435. In contrast, surveys in 12 African countries

show unweighted averages of 74% of men and 91% of women aged 15± 49 years with

no non-regular sex partners in the past year, and only 3.7% of men and 0.7% of

women with more than four non-regular partners20. At about the same time, a

survey in Denmark found that 19% of adults aged 18± 59 years reported more than

one sex partner in the past year39; a survey in France found that 17% of men and

7.9% of women aged 18± 44 years reported more than one sex partner in

the past year40; and a survey in the UK found that 17% of men and 8.4% of

women aged 16± 44 years reported more than one sex partner in the past year41.

Studies of sexual behaviour do not show as much partner change in Africa as

modellers have assumed, nor do they show differences in heterosexual behaviour

between Africa and Europe that could explain major differences in epidemic

growth.[Link]

Numerous people are found in Africa who have HIV, but don't have sex:

During the last 14 years, a number of studies have reported adults

contracting HIV without sexual exposures to HIV. A study in Zimbabwe in the

1990s found 2.1% HIV prevalence among 933 women with no sexual experience48. In

a 1988 study of discordant couples in Rwanda, 15 of 25 HIV-positive women with

HIV-negative partners reported only one lifetime sex partner49. In a 1990 study

of teenagers in Uganda, 6.9% of women with no sex partners in the last ® ve

years were HIV positive vs 23% for those with one or more partners; for men, 1%

with no partners in the last ® ve years were HIV-positive vs 2.5% of those

reporting partners50. Among young adults 15± 24 years old in Tanzania, a 1995

study found HIV prevalence of 5.6% among men and 3.6% among women who did not

report any lifetime sexual activity vs 4.8% and 12% for men and women reporting

one or more sexual partners51. In a 1999 study in South Africa, 6.8% of women

and 1.2% of men 14± 24 years old who reported never having sex were HIV

positive; however, a validation study found some under-reporting of sexual

activity52. In a case± control study in Uganda, in two of seven cases with only

one lifetime sexual partner, the partner was HIV-negative, three were HIV

positive, and two others not tested53.[Link]

[...]

In a later report from Rwanda, 7.3% (54 of 704) of mothers of children with

AIDS were HIV-negative; transfusions were identi® ed as the risk factor for 22

of the

54 children54. Of 26 children less than 15 years old admitted to the Uganda

Cancer Institute with Kaposi's sarcoma during 1989± 94 for which the mother was

tested for HIV, 19% (® ve of 26) had HIV-negative mothers55. A study in Burkina

Faso in 1989± 90 found 23% (11 of 48) of HIV-positive children to have

HIV-negative mothers; six of 11 had been transfused, and the others reported

multiple injections56.

A different source estimates that 25% of South African women newly infected with

HIV did not have sex in the past 12 months. Note that having had sex in the past

12 months of course doesn't mean the HIV was spread by having sex:

The sexualization of the HIV epidemic in South Africa has been used as

evidence that unsafe medical injections are of minimal importance to

transmission in Africa, because the country was thought to be free of unsafe

injection risks. More recent observation reveals routine failures in infection

control in South African maternity and paediatric wards and in public dental

clinics. In one province at least one medical injection in five is administered

with a used needle or syringe. Over 25% of new HIV infections identified in

South African adults using the BED IgG capture enzyme immunoassay in 2005 were

in individuals reporting they had not been sexually active in the past 12

months. Immunization injections received at public health facilities are

associated with HIV infections in children, many of whom may have passed HIV to

their mothers during breastfeeding. South Africa is one of few countries in

sub-Saharan Africa not using auto-disable (non-reusable) syringes for all

immunizations. Using resource scarcity as justification for needle reuse is

ethically indefensible, as injection safety is a readily achievable goal.[Link]

17.5% of HIV positive children have HIV negative mothers:

This review considers whether HIV prevalence data on children in sub-Saharan

Africa support the hypothesis that blood exposures account for a large

proportion of HIV infections in Africa. Data from a systematic search on

HIV-infected children support two analyses. In 25 studies where the mothers' HIV

status was not matched with data on each child (excluding non-representative

samples of children), the observed prevalence in children in 20 studies was

greater than expected from vertical transmission. The population-weighted

difference - 1.3% - was approximately one-third of observed prevalence in

children. In 32 studies that match HIV-positive children with HIV-negative

mothers, 406 discordant mother-child pairs were identified, and in studies

identifying at least five non-vertical infections in children, 17.5% of

HIV-positive children had HIV-negative mothers. In discussing an important role

for unsafe health care in exceptionally rapid HIV transmission in Africa,

leading AIDS researchers cite low HIV prevalence in children not yet sexually

active. The assumption that childhood HIV prevalence would increase with age in

children, if injections transmitted HIV is shown to be erroneous; it fails to

account for early mortality in HIV-positive children. Evidence of child-to-child

HIV transmission supports the theory that nosocomial infections are important to

the AIDS pandemic, and procedures more prevalent than blood transfusions, such

as injections, are likely involved.[Link]

Note that a HIV positive child with a HIV positive mother did not necessarily

seroconvert due to exposure from its mother.

From the Times online:

THE African Aids pandemic was caused more by careless use of needles in

healthcare than by unsafe sex, a report published today by an international

group of scientists says.

They estimate that more than half the cases of Aids in Africa before 1988

were caused by unsterilised needles. The claim, directly challenging the belief

that 90 per cent of cases were sexually transmitted, implies that the African

Aids pandemic is largely the result of unsafe medical practices and mismanaged

vaccination campaigns.

The team says that the evidence was discounted because of " preconceptions

about African sexuality and a desire to maintain public trust in

healthcare " .[Link]

Other STDs decline while HIV skyrockets:

During the 1990s HIV propagated rapidly in Zimbabwe, increasing at an

estimated rate of 12% annually. At the same time, the overall sexually

transmitted infections (STI) burden declined an estimated 25% and while there

was a parallel increase in reported condom use by high-risk persons

(prostitutes, lorry drivers, miners, and young people).[Link]

Unsafe injections are an epidemic in Africa:

In total 44% of health workers reported practicing some form of unsafe

injection equipment reuse. The most common practice is reuse of the syringe

after changing the needle (36%). Several health workers practiced more than one

type of unsafe reuse. Only 2% of health workers reported they would reuse a

needle and syringe on another patient, but 39% would reuse either the needle or

the syringe. In total 13% would reuse injection equipment to flush a patient's

catheter (Table 1).[Link]

Epidemiological evidence is available:

Thirty-eight percent of men and 50% of women received at least one injection

from a healthcare provider in the previous 12 months. The average number of

medical injections per person per year was 1.9 for men and 2.5 for women. HIV

prevalence was much higher among men (10.8%) and women (11.4%) who received five

or more medical injections in the past year than among those who received no

injections (4.0%among men and 6.3% among women). Men and women who received 3-4

injections also had higher HIV prevalence (6.6% among men and 8.3% among women)

than those who had no injections. Even after accounting for several risk factors

and potential confounders, men and women who received five or more injections

were significantly more likely to be HIV-positive than those who had no

injections (aOR=2.35,95%CI:1.78-3.11 for men; aOR=1.55, 95%CI:1.24-1.94 for

women). Excluding HIV infected adults who were chronically ill in the past 12

months reduced the magnitude slightly, but the relationship remained significant

(aOR=2.25, 95%CI:1.68-3.01 for men;aOR=1.47, 95%CI:1.17-1.85 for women).[Link]

More than half of all medical injections in the developing world are estimated

to be unsafe.[Link] A recent estimate of the risk per medical injection put the

rate at one infection per 30 injections.[Link] HIV survives the application of

common disinfectants for at least a week.[Link] The fact that South Africa has a

relatively low rate of Hepatitis B could be explained by the fact that all

children in South Africa are vaccinated against Hepatitis B.

HIV in Africa is a man-made epidemic kept alive by the medical system. Without

doctors, there would be no AIDS epidemic. The pharmaceutical industry has failed

humanity. However, scaremongering about HIV and spreading condoms in Africa may

have a very different effect. Driving down the birth rate. Is this why the WHO

keeps enforcing the lie that 90% of cases in Africa are caused by heterosexual

sexual contact?

Geplaatst door D.R. op 2:12 PM

3 reacties:

gyg3s said...

Interesting post.

In view of the above, what should we make of Thabo Mbeki?

What should we make of the lazy charge of 'Denialism' used to avoid

challenging and defeating someone's argument with reason and data?

April 25, 2011 4:06 AM

Anonymous said...

Interesting point you make, but this is a rather serious accusation even

when it seems to fit the picture very well. However I don't think this is a

conspiracy going on. Just really many stupid people that copy of themselves so

the dumbness seems to be directed, like a swarm. So yes, they may decimate the

population or lower the birthrate but I don't think it's intentionally done.

even if there may be people who intend to and are aware of the facts i don't

think there is a doctor evil sitting with his cat laughing about the plan to

distribute condoms for AIDS.

Condoms in general are in no way anything bad, and not the people who

distribute them lower birthrates but the people who use them.

Anyway facts should be communicated to the people so the right things could

be done.

Something I read about AIDS is that the tests are different for each

continent so infected people are tested negative and people notinfected can be

tested positive depending on the continental standard used and the true origin

of the testees.

There is a whole lot of confusion going around the topic, I really can't

tell anymore what to believe as of a lack of genuine documetation. Maybe you dig

a little bit more into the topic, I'd be happy to see the results of your

investigation on the origins of AIDS and HIV.

BTW

You really _are_ the king of long blog post.

And one thing I wanted to tell you long time ago, I just don't have the time

to comment, man you are really smart and now comes a but.. - but you are not

smart enough to consider every aspect, and never will be to understand. No one

is. And so the scientific method is to proof yourself wrong, and if you can't

you don't consider it right. I'm saying cause I read some single points in other

posts here that were wrong, and you seem to be strict that there is no other

correct than yours. I hope you are still able to differ, and adapt to new facts.

Can't go into detail, anyway I really enjoy reading, keep it up!

April 25, 2011 4:38 PM

Rothscum said...

The idea that HIV doesn't cause AIDS is disinfo brought into the world by

Duesberg. Mbeki fell for a scam.

April 26, 2011 3:46 AM

http://davidrothscum.blogspot.com/2011/04/aids-in-africa-is-spread-by-unsafe.htm\

l

April 26, 2011