Email to amfAR concerning origins of HIV Retrovirus

I have recently published a novel entitled “The Abomination Project” which hypothesizes that the HIV Retrovirus was a man-made bio weapon used by Rhodesian and/or South African Government(s) in reaction to the Black Nationalist revolution that occurred in the latter half of the 20^th century.

While doing internet research on various topics for the novel, I found Dr. Mathilde Krim mentioned as a scientist who believed that the HIV Retrovirus was accidently man-made while developing a vaccine. She was listed with other discredited theories made by Cantwell, Strecker, etc. I searched for the internet article mentioning her, but could not find it again. I also could not find any posting from her about her theory.

I am hoping you can provide me with the URL of her original posting concerning her theory of man-made HIV Retrovirus. I want to include her original statement in the Sources section of the novel’s website www.theabominationproject.com.

I have also written a blog concerning the absence of origins research regarding the HIV Retrovirus. I am sure the genetic structure of SIV and HIV Retrovirus have been compared and probabilities calculated supporting either the man-made or natural mutation theory. Some attempt at replication must have been made. The blog is in the Blog section of the website.

In closing, Dr. Krim and amfAR have made extraordinary contributions to the research, prevention, and treatment of AIDS for the past thirty years. These contributions were especially important during the early years of AIDS because of Reagan’s non-response to the pandemic. I am sure you will continue to be a major player in stopping the disease.

Thank you for your cooperation,

Rick Jamrozy, Ph.D.                   

Epidemiology is not a science

Epidemiology, as a useful science, falls somewhere between creation science and astrology. Their research methodology seems to have been borrowed from actuarial science which appears to be another non-scientific science.

Actuaries work for insurance companies and develop mathematical models that determine the risk of insuring certain people or things. So, life, health, home, casualty, medical malpractice insurance, or any other insurance you can possibly imagine are all grist for their unscientific mill. The premiums you pay for your insurances are developed by actuaries, and it is their job to guarantee that insurance companies make a profit, a large profit. The actuaries are not hired to do research and report how nature works.

Epidemiologists took the concept of risk and actuarial mathematical models and they developed something called a risk factor. No other legitimate science uses this term because it has no real scientific meaning.

Real science uses the terms cause or correlation to describe the results of their scientific research. And they use statistical analysis to determine if there is a relationship between variables and how certain they are that the relationship they are reporting was not obtained by chance or error. Epidemiologists don’t.

An example.  A recent epidemiological study reported that married people live 7 to 15 years longer than “never married” people. So their conclusion was that “never being married” was a risk factor for premature death. If you are an insurance company, you simply raise the premium for never married policy holders and make a bigger profit.

 That is annoying enough, but if you are an epidemiologist working for the Federal government, you take your flawed study to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. You suggest that the Federal government start a propaganda campaign to encourage “never married” citizens to hurry up and get married. And you might take your flawed study to a scientifically illiterate Congressman or Senator and suggest that legislation is needed to force “never married” citizens to marry immediately. After all, lives are at stake. Immediate action must be taken. The “never married” are increasing the cost of health care. Perhaps “never married” income tax rates should be increased. Perhaps “never married” behavior should be criminalized so that they can be forced into rehabilitation programs to alter their “never married” attitudes.

Sounds crazy doesn’t it. But it happens all the time.

What’s wrong with the epidemiological study and its conclusions? Everything. Morbidity is caused by many factors, and usually many factors in combination. Like; race, income, medical service availability, weight, occupation, genetic susceptibility to certain diseases, State of residency, and about two hundred other factors. They took just one possible factor and compared morbidity to the categories of “never married” and “married”. Other factors will most assuredly have a higher correlation with morbidity than whether or not someone is married.  They didn’t even bother to include divorced and windowed people. Sloppy science? Absurd non-science.

But they sent out their press releases to the media outlets and suddenly we are inundated with misleading information. Will a propaganda campaign be forthcoming? Will legislation be introduced when Congress resumes working?

That is the most frustrating part of this situation. Real scientists should be complaining loudly about anybody, citizen or legislator, thinking that epidemiology is a science. And media should simply toss those press releases into the waste can where they belong. I am beginning to think that all epidemiologists are conservatives who are promoting the family values agenda.           

Really now! What was the origin of HIV RETROVIRUS?

The discovery of HIV Retrovirus is almost three decades old. To date approximately 25 million people have died because of this killer disease. Countless millions, perhaps billions, of dollars have been spent on research, prevention, and treatment which is fine, but a clear, definitive statement about the origin of HIV has not been made. Clearly, the absence of this origins statement is inexcusable.

I presume that during the 30 years of its existence, some researchers have compared the genetic structure of SIV with the genetic structure of HIV retrovirus. The differences should allow these researchers to determine the probability that SIV would mutate into HIV retrovirus because of god, natural mutation, or man-made mutation either accidently or purposely. The probability that god made it to punish gays, blacks, hookers, IV drug users, and promiscuous citizens is zero. Something that doesn’t exist can’t create something that does exist. This god theory is just plain stupid.

I would expect that the probability of a natural mutation of SIV into HIV retrovirus would be very low. The natural mutation of a benign monkey virus into a virulent human killer is quite a feat. It would not only have to jump a species, but it would also have to become an indestructible retrovirus. However, the probability would not be zero. Researchers should have determined by now what conditions would be necessary to naturally produce such a mutation. That is, they should be able to replicate the HIV retrovirus mutation in a SIV infected monkey under controlled conditions. If that mutation occurs, then the natural mutation has more weight. The transmission from monkey to man scenario sounds like a fairy tale, but it is possible.

I would expect the man-made mutation theory of SIV to HIV to be much more probable. Researchers should have already tried to replicate the HIV retrovirus by modifying SIV using gene replacement techniques, or if they believe that was created accidently while developing some vaccine, replicate the accidental mutation. If either can be done successfully, then the man-made theory also has more weight.

To prove any theory, repeated replications by different researchers in the laboratory is absolutely necessary. I have not found any publically available information that any replication has been successful or even attempted. So, the question is what have these researchers been doing for the past 30 years?

In my novel, “The Abomination Project”, I conclude that the HIV retrovirus was a man-made Bio weapon that was released into the Sub-Saharan African black population for Geo-political reasons. I won’t repeat all of the circumstantial evidence here in this blog, but it would be simple and inexpensive to make attempts to replicate the mutation of SIV into HIV retrovirus. Publicize the results of these attempts and the unanswered question of man-made or natural mutation would be answered. The failure to publicize research replication attempts to prove the natural mutation or man-made theory of HIV retrovirus automatically makes me think “cover up’.  And that worries me. If it happened once, it could happen again.       

          

Visit our website!

http://www.theabominationproject.com