Dealing with Doctors: HIV+? How can you find a doctor who isn't going to treat you like you're going to die tomorrow?

By HEAL Toronto

"The doctor is fighting for a theory.
The man is fighting for his life."
Oscar Wilde

In order to help people better evaluate their prospective practitioner Dr. Michael Ellner offers you this test:

A) If you are otherwise healthy and have simply tested positive you must look the prospective practitioner in the eye and say, "I am 'HIV positive' and am told that I am at risk for AIDS. Do you think it is possible for me to live a long and healthy life?" If the practitioner says anything but yes, find another practitioner!

B) If you have one or more AIDS indicator diseases or conditions, the test is a little different. In addition to eye contact, you must physically make contact with the doctor and say, "I have 'AIDS'. Do you think it is possible for me to regain my health and live a long healthy life?" If the practitioner says anything but yes run for your life! Then calmly find another practitioner.

The problem right now is very few doctors will pass Dr. Ellner's test. Most doctors are deep in the "AIDS Zone". Many "HIV primary care physicians" or AIDS doctors have built their whole careers on the principle that HIV causes AIDS and antivirals are the only hope for therapy. Face it, doctors mainly prescribe drugs to treat their patients - and most of their patients want the drugs, as they are brought up in a consumer society hooked on pharmaceuticals. What do you think would happen to an AIDS doctor's business if s/he told patients that it is NOT a good idea to treat "HIV" with antiviral drugs and recommended treating illnesses with proven standard treatments only if symptoms occur? (It is not unlikely that doctors could be sued for taking this position.)

There are other strategies.

First, educate yourself as much as possible. It is time consuming but can turn into a fascinating and empowering project.

Next, consider a strategy to get rational care from a doctor.

So you want to be treated for your illnesses in the same way as everyone else - with the belief that you will get better and go off treatment (drugs)?

Here are some suggestions:

It's best to shop for a doctor when you are feeling well. Just as we should never go to the supermarket on an empty stomach.

1. Lie to the doctor. It is always important to be completely honest with your doctor about your symptoms and life style (especially drug and alcohol consumption) so they can treat you properly. BUT if you have come to the conclusion that HIV/AIDS is a huge collective fallacy, you may have to make an exception about your HIV+ test result. The problem is that every single health problem can become a symptom of AIDS in the minds of many doctors and they may not treat you (ie: prescribe drugs) with your life long survival in mind. AIDS doctors prescribe all kinds of drugs besides "antivirals" in longer, stronger and sometimes permanent treatment regimens. They generally assume that you are going to die soon anyway so the long term ill effects of prescription drugs need not be considered. So, if you're a good actor, "pull a straight" and find a doctor who will treat you like everyone else.
   
   Sometimes this strategy is difficult as the new doctor may want to get your records from your previous doctor who may have on record your HIV+ status. You might say that you have always been generally healthy, and in the last 10 years, you just went to various walk-in clinics when you needed attention. (Your family physician long ago retired and he having been such an ogre you avoided developing a new doctor-patient relationship.) Walk-in-clinics in fact, are another option. You can always go to a walk in clinic (preferably outside the gay neighborhood) and try not to give them any reason to think you might be "HIV+". This is also a good way to get a second opinion if you think your AIDS doctor is not treating you rationally. (If seeking a second opinion never begin by tell the second doctor what the first one diagnosed or prescribed.)

2. Cut a deal with the doctor. You may want to sign a contract that states you will not hold your doctor responsible for NOT treating you with "anti viral cocktails" or other designer drug regimens. At the same time the contract should ask your doctor to treat you and prescribe any drugs in the same way he would an "HIV negative" patient. (Although one might wonder if any AIDS doctors still remember how to do that.) This is offered with a lesser recommendion than the covert option but it may be the only one for "fabulous flaming creatures" and people who aren't good actors. Remember, even if you sign a contract, your doctor still knows.

Dr.Valender F. Turner: I think those of us who are not HIV positive cannot even begin to imagine how profoundly the psyche and health of an individual is affected by belief in the existence of a lethal retrovirus inexorably eating at the immune system. It must take extreme valour to even question what almost the whole of the rest of world believes to be true.

Huw Christie: We should study long term survivors with HIV antibodies to delineate what factors lead HIV positive individuals towards diseases?

VFT: Or away from diseases. That would be of enormous interest and benefit.

HC: What about people with actual AIDS defining diseases?

VFT: As I said before, the diseases should be vigorously treated in their own right.

HC: What if someone not in a risk group is healthy but positive?

VFT: The only honest answer is that, from the antibodies point of view, there are no data upon which to pronounce a prognosis.

HC: Why do you say that?

VFT: Because from a purely scientific point of view, to determine whether these antibodies represent an independent hazard, one would have to take a hundred or so healthy, no risk, HIV positive individuals and follow them untreated for a number of years and see what happens. But you would not be able to tell them they’re HIV positive.

HC: Why not?

VFT: Because, as we've just discussed, patients and physicians believe most fervently that being HIV positive is a death sentence. This belief and the possible administration of anti-HIV drugs may themselves produce illness. These two variables would severely confound the experiment.

HC: As a doctor yourself, what in particular would you say patients should ask their doctors?

VFT: Request scientific proof that the antibodies present in your body arise for no other reason than infection with a virus called HIV.

HC: What if the answer is don’t worry, trust us and the tests are virtually perfect?

VFT: Then ask how, where and when and by whom this was established. Request citations, scientific papers, names, dates, places, researchers, journals. Get a copy of our 1993 Bio/Technology paper or our latest paper, or this or Eleni’s interview, or some of the other stuff Christine Johnson has written about our research, and ask that each point is specifically answered. What you must find out is how the specificity of your test was determined. Since all the HIV experts declare cross-reacting antibodies affect both ELISAs and the Western blot, ask how they know your antibodies aren't all cross-reacting. Put that very question. And refuse to accept obfuscatory remarks and don't be put off by big names and big institutions.

HC: What if the answer includes advice to have a viral load test?

VFT: Then ask your doctor for proof that the RNA or DNA used in the test to match your RNA or DNA is a unique constituent of a particle proven to be an infectious retrovirus. I know the experts now regard virus particles old hat but on the other hand, they still say a particle called HIV causes AIDS. So there has to be a direct link between the RNA and DNA and a particle. Where is it? Contact the manufacturer of the primers and probes and ask for the scientific justification for the label on the bottle. And since the PCR is quite capable of amplifying non-target sequences, how and where the sensitivity and specificity of the test for HIV infection was determined?

HC: What if one’s told it’s all too hard to understand?

VFT: It's not hard to understand. I know it takes time but basically most of this stuff is EASY to understand. You know Huw, Papadopulos-Eleopulos et al have spent well over a decade behaving impeccably as scientists and all we’ve really proven is that even if you think you're right, that forms about three percent of the answer. The issues we’ve written about languish waiting for scientific responses. The trouble is so many of us, doctors included, accept the validity of the HIV theory and all the tests because of big names and big institutions. In good faith I must add but nonetheless without checking up for themselves or asking questions. Well, they're not usually the ones told they're infected with a lethal retrovirus. So patients must be their own advocates and thereby influence public opinion towards the debate. Let me remind you of what Galileo said, "In Science the authority embodied in the opinion of thousands is not worth a spark of reason in one man".