The Perth Group on "Viral Load"

However, in addition to the many other problems mentioned so far:

1. With PCR one detects only small fragments of nucleic acid sequences which means that a positive PCR is not proof for the existence of the whole genome.

2. PCR reproducibility and specificity have not been determined.

To date only one study, by French researchers, has been published where such effort was reported.

These authors did not use the only scientifically valid gold standard, that is HIV isolation. Instead, as a gold standard, they used the antibody test. Even so they found that:

"false-positive and false-negative results were observed in all laboratories (concordance with serology) ranged from 40% to 100%"

The same data revealed that in the seven French laboratories with extensive experience in PCR detection of "HIV DNA", of 138 samples shown to contain "HIV DNA", 34 (25%) did not contain "HIV antibodies" while of 262 specimens that did not contain "HIV DNA", 17 (6%) did contain "HIV antibodies".

Even with PCR nobody has ever presented proof for the existence of the whole HIV genome in even one, single cell of even one AIDS patient.

In fact, even a part of the "HIV" genome cannot be detected in all patients.

A striking feature of the results obtained so far [1990] is the scarcity or apparent absence of viral DNA in proportion of patients.

The HIV genome has undergone a further resurrection by the development of tests which claim to quantify the HIV in plasma, that is the viral load. There are 3 main tests and they suffer from all the limitations mentioned so far.

For example, in a study by French researchers they cultured 15 HIV-1 strains. Strain zero, which is said to be the most diverse, was not included. They tested samples of cell free fluid containing the same load of HIV as quantified by p24 measurements. (Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes and Human Retrovirology 15:174.)

If the tests were true measurement of HIV RNA the results should have been the same for all strains in a given test and all tests for a specific strain.

Open

As can be seen, this is not the case. If this test measured the "viral load" accurately, every number to the right of the first column should be identical.

One wonders how such tests can be used to measure anything, much less to quantify a deadly virus.

According to the HIV theory of AIDS, increase in viral load leads to AIDS, but what has been found is that increase in "viral load" follows does not precede disease. Resolution of disease decreases "viral load".

The current anti-HIV drugs are said to act by preventing fresh cycles of infection, that is by preventing the formation of new proviral DNA in previously uninfected cells, which in turn prevents the formation of new RNA within these cells and the production of new viral particles.

Thus drugs that decrease the viral load, that is, RNA, should first decrease the proviral DNA, that is, the "viral burden".

But what is found is that the viral load decreases to undetectable levels while there is no significant decrease in DNA.

Thus either "HIV RNA" and "HIV DNA" or both are not HIV, or RT and protease inhibitors do not have anti-HIV effects.

They only prohibit the measurement of RNA.

If the former is the case then there can be no HIV genome and thus no anti-HIV drugs.

As the title of Montagnier's paper reveals: HIV and thus HIV RNA, HIV DNA, HIV proteins and HIV antibodies, that is, the existence of HIV, is based upon claims of the isolation of a unique infectious retrovirus.

Such proof does not exist.

Thank you very much for your attention tonight.*