SCIENTIFIC TRUTH
By David Tyson
26 Dec. 1998
The Tysons are currently under court order to administer the useless and highly toxic drug AZT (a cytostatica) to their son Felix (who is HIV negative) for 6 weeks to prevent him from developing antibodies to HIV. This article was released on the internet by the father, David Tyson.
When my wife, Kathleen, tested positive for HIV in October, 1998, the
sixth month of her pregnancy, we were both stunned. Even more confusing
was the HIV negative status of my blood test. We have been married for
over ten years, monogamous, and never received blood transfusions.Our
calculations indicate that we have had 300% more sessions of unprotected
sex than the literature suggests is required for transmission. Kathleen
is and always has been a robust specimen. It was clear that what we had
heard about HIV and what we were observing in our own bodies raised a
number of profound questions.
On our doctor's advice Kathleen started a regimen of a protease
inhibitor and AZT, Lamivudine and Zidovudine (a cancer chemotherapy
which had been abandoned as useless but then resurrected as a powerful
antiretroviral agent).
I hit the books, maximally motivated to get a grasp on the science of
our situation and, as it turns out, the politics of the plague warriors.
After several weeks intensively reviewing the "literature" disseminated
by the NIH (National Institute of Health) and the CDC (Center for
Disease Control) I was angry and frustrated.Nowhere, apparently, was
there any scientific elucidation on a causative link between HIV and
AIDS. There were assumptions and opinions aplenty, often conflicting and
contradictory, some suspiciously obscure and obtuse lab reports, but
nothing resembling the precise and thoughtful elucidation which I
associate with scientific thinking.
I was not, I discovered, alone in my frustration.
Dr. Kary Mullis, recipient of the 1993 Nobel prize for chemistry for his
invention of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), someone eminently more
qualified than myself to discover such a document, was unable to do so
as well. Dr. Mullis reports:
did computer searches. Neither Montagnier, Gallo, nor anyone
else had published papers describing experiments which led to
the conclusion that H.I.V. probably caused AIDS. I read the
papers in Science for which they had become well known as
AIDS doctors, but all they had said there was that they had found
evidence of a past infection by something which was probably
H.I.V. in some AIDS patients. They found antibodies. Antibodies
to viruses had always been considered evidence of past disease,
not present disease. Antibodies signaled that the virus had been
defeated. The patient had saved himself. There was no indication
in these papers that this virus caused a disease.
They didn't show that everybody with the antibodies had the
disease. In fact they found some healthy people with antibodies.("The Medical Establishment vs. the Truth," Penthouse, Sept. 1998)
Kary Mullis goes on to note that to obtain scientific satisfaction in
matters pertaining to HIV and AIDS one can do no better than review the
literature developed by Peter Duesberg, Ph.D., professor of microbiology
at the University of California, Berkeley. Duesberg has studied
retroviruses for 25 years and is considered by some to have the most
brilliant mind in the field today.
Duesberg, it turns out, has argued all along that HIV cannot possibly
cause AIDS. His arguments take on the cadence and power of mathematical
certainty. Perhaps the most compelling strategy he utilizes to arrive at
his conclusion is the well known scientific principle which states that
a theory, in order to be useful, must accurately predict observed
phenomena. It can be demonstrated that the infectious HIV/AIDS theory
predicts none of the observed phenomena. (My own highly personal
observation corroborates this!)
I should mention that there came a point in my research where I started
getting a creepy feeling about our medical establishment. Science, it
seems, and conventional wisdom appear to take divergent paths. If
Duesberg is correct (as appears more and more likely as evidence
accumulates) the American medical establishment and particularly the CDC
should start to notice a substance significantly more repugnant than egg
on its collective face. We have an epidemic on our hands all right, an
epidemic of bad science, promulgated by the NIH and the CDC,
co-conspirited by legions of duped and unquestioning doctors of
medicine. This affair seen in all its stark and ghastly ramifications is
nothing short of murderous fraud on a vast, multibillion dollar, global
scale.
But I should perhaps return to my own story.
My failure to find any elucidation of the mechanism of pathogenicity for
the HIV/AIDS hypothesis, and my success in discovering conclusive
evidence ofthe powerful toxicity and damage to the immune system
associated with antiretroviral drugs, convinced my wife and I to abandon
her therapy. Compelling scientific arguments put forth by John
Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D, Dr. Eleni Papadopulos, a biophysicist, Dr. Roberto
Giraldo, an infectious disease specialist, (none of whom, incidentally,
are funded through the NIH or CDC) which indicate that HIV is, at worst,
a harmless endogenous retrovirus diminished our health concerns
considerably. Instead of a C-section we planned to have a vaginal birth,
refuse any AZT for our newborn and breastfeed him. If the doctors didn't
like it, well, they could always find some other poor sucker to whom to
sell their bill of goods. So it was that our baby, Felix Hugh, was born
at 9:55 p.m. on the 7th of December, 1998. He weighed 7 lbs., 7 oz. and
was as perfect and healthy a little boy as anyone could possibly hope.
We were still basking in the glow of the miracle of birth on the 8th
when a stranger entered our hospital room. This person identified herself
as an infectious disease pediatrician. She had been referred to us by our
regular pediatrician. I must confess that I was not then, nor have I
become since, particularly impressed by doctors of medicine. They are,
as a group, with spectacular exceptions, prone to follow blindly
whatever authority provides them with credentials to charge a great deal
of money for dispensing, at best, common sense and, at worst, deadly
experimental drugs. (Some of us may recall the thalidomide experiment
performed by esteemed doctors of medicine.)
It developed that this particular doctor of medicine had become
concerned because Kathleen had eschewed her antiretroviral drugs,
refused AZT for Felix and was (horror upon horrors) breastfeeding the
little tike!
She became quite emotional on the subject, evoking the terrible trauma
of treating infants with AIDS, the painful decisions regarding ever more
powerful combinations of drugs as the virus mutated and the child
deteriorated. (HIV has been shown to be incapable of mutating and
remaining viable. It barely has 9000 nucleotides, hardly the crafty foe
myth has made it out to be.) It was simply terrifying, she remarked, how
the infernal HIV eluded the earnest efforts of plague warriors like
herself to expunge it from its lair in the lymph nodes and bone marrow
of its victims. We didn't begin to realize, the doc pleaded, the awful
risk to which we were exposing Felix.
As I have indicated we were far from ignorant on these issues.Yet she
was absolutely intolerant of our views. (How dare we question the wise
counsel she offered!) She snorted with indignation at the mention of
Peter Duesberg. "What an egomaniac," she muttered. And she then and to
this day reminded me of no one so much as the evil fairy in Sleeping
Beauty who, enraged at not being invited to the birthday celebration,
lays a curse on the beautiful child.
We were to discover what form this curse was to take later that evening
when hospital security forces cordoned off the maternity ward at Sacred
Heart. Apparently some concern had arisen that we would attempt to blow
that popstand and high tail it to the winter hills with our newborn,
inoculating him with the dread HIV, the virus which causes AIDS, through
mama's contaminated breasts. Into this increasingly surreal and
nightmarish scenario came the petitioner from the court, a character out
of a Kafka novel, with her sidekick, a uniformed officer of the law. We
were informed that the State of Oregon had taken custody of Felix. The
petitioner handed me a summons. We were charged with "intent to harm"
Felix. Apparently if you don't buy into the unsubstantiated gibberish
promulgated by the CDC you are intending to harm your newborn baby.
Felix was released to our physical custody on the condition that we
poison him with .65 ml of AZT every six hours and did not breastfeed
him.
At the hearing on the 11th this order was amended to read "follow
medical advice", which we have done to the utmost of our ability,
consulting with physicians from around the world in earnest attempt to
care for Felix in a manner consistent with the most scientific,
state-of-the-art thinking in this matter.
Now it seems to me that this sort of medical fascism has implications on
the civil liberties of us all. When the State sees fit to literally hold
your child in ransom for your cooperation with a highly controversial
and experimental health program, which is based on an unproved
hypothesis which is, in turn, challenged by some of the best minds in
the world, something is horribly amiss. No longer can any of us feel
aloof from the fray. Our science, our dignity as responsible citizens
and our desire as parents to insure the welfare of our children is all
being swept aside by the paranoid plague mongers of the Center for
Disease Control.
As I discovered it is a mistake to believe that maybe if you ignore them
they will go away.
The malignancy of the 50 billion dollars a year HIV/AIDS industry
includes lucrative research grants, the HIV test kit business and
pharmaceutical giants like Glaxo Wellcome. Tens of thousands of people
are employed in this racket, er, industry. Tens of thousands of people
owe their livelihood to the unlikely hypothesis that HIV causes AIDS.
And some of them even know how to compose pamphlets instructing us on
the techniques of safe sex and how to bleach our hypodermics before
shooting up.
For a major institution like the CDC to admit such colossal and
murderous blunder is not very likely. If there is evidence against their
theory they can manufacture contrary evidence in a matter of hours. The
financial muscle of their buddies over at Glaxo Wellcome can wheel into
position a formidable arsenal of attorneys and so-called experts to dupe
the public. About the only thing they don't have in their favor is the
truth, the scientific truth and nothing but the scientific truth. And
the powerful thing about the scientific truth is that eventually it is
all so obvious to everyone we wonder how we could ever have thought
otherwise, and the wool falls from our eyes. And we recognize the wicked
ones in our midst.
I look forward to seeing them on the witness stand under oath. I look
forward to seeing them behind bars. *
David H. Tyson
475 Miami Ln.
Eugene, OR. 97403
tysn@rio.com