HIV/AIDS is the only infection we know of with 100% mortality; cocktails & ART have reduced the HIV load & as such allows CD4 cells (also known as helper T-cells) to increase & thus strengthen your
immune system; problem is antiretrovirals cause drug resistant HIV that is more complex, difficult, expensive to treat; Monkey-pox & HIV are both infections/disease of the GAY, bisexual community
HIV has never been an infection of the heterosexual community. The media and left and UN and WHO and CDC and Fauci and Njoo et al. have tried to confuse you and make you think it is a heterosexual issue.
It never was.
HIV was always an infection of the GAY and bisexual community (and I wrote about this given the hysteria on monkey-pox that is also an infection of the GAY and bisexual and tranny community) and became an issue for the heterosexual community only when GAY and bisexual HIV positive men (or men engaging in high-risk behavior like injecting drug use and multiple partners etc.) (and women) visited their other partners before going home. Their spouse was not the wiser as bisexual GAY males visited GAY bathhouses etc. The wife or partner was home, often monogamous yet she did not know he was sleeping with men too who had HIV (or were at risk and had high-risk behavior).
We found this out (I was a Canadian epidemiologist) when we conducted 2nd and 3rd generation behavioral risk surveillance, and we detected HIV among pregnant women. We use pregnant women (women visiting pre-natal clinics too) as a sentinel surveillance flag system, best we got, for a pregnant woman is typically near 100% monogamous, especially in the state of pregnancy (entering or just leaving) and if she is married and at home, the very lowest risk in a society for STDs etc. We look for esoteric and high-risk STDs in pregnant women for we expect to find ZERO there.
When we found HIV in prenatally screened women, we knew HIV had leapt from the GAY and bisexual community to the lowest risk sub-group, pregnant women, and the ONLY way that could have happened is if GAY and bisexual males who were married and/or in monogamous relationships (so she thought) and she got pregnant, and they, the men, were engaging in high-risk men-on-men sex, along with sex with her. Unknown to her.
So GAY and bisexual men, don’t do this to your wives and partners at home. Same risk for HIV as is monkey pox for you GAY and bisexual males, stop with the promiscuous behavior. Limit to ONE sex partner ONLY. Who are faithful and monogamous. Do not sleep around for you are unfair to her (partner at home) and the unborn baby who could become infected in utero. There are huge complications for baby. At least tell her you are bisexual and like penis anal sex with men and visit bathhouses so she can have a choice to refuse your sex advances and protect herself.
HIV has 100% mortality if you live long enough and do not succumb to another illness like heart disease. HIV/AIDS will kill you if you live long enough. There is no cure. Good news is cocktails etc. prolong life but there are costs. There are OPPORTUNITY COSTS.
Who was that black basketball player back in the 80's who was HIV positive, he didn't die, maybe he refused the deadly Fauci treatment.
AIDS and HIV are not the same thing and there is no evidence 1 causes the other
HIV is said that is has never been isolated with no atomic weight,
HIV virions are indeed smaller than 5 nm, typically ranging from 1.2 to 1.4 nm in size. This puts them below the resolution limit of even the most advanced electron microscopes available today.
This gap in our ability to directly visualize structures between the resolution limits of light microscopy and electron microscopy is often referred to as the "resolution gap" or the "visualization gap." It presents a significant challenge in the study of small biological structures like certain viruses, proteins, and macromolecular complexes.
Transmission electron microscopes (TEMs) can achieve resolutions down to about 0.05 nm, while scanning electron microscopes (SEMs) have a resolution limit of around 0.4 to 0.5 nm. However, these resolutions are still insufficient to directly image the smallest viruses like HIV.
I believe this also relates to SARS-COVID-19
STD and gut biome can lead to immune problems,
Mixing the sperm biome with the gut biome causes an imbalance
Many people remain HIV-negative while displaying AIDS-like symptoms.
Many individuals have experienced HIV remission, meaning they previously had HIV but the virus became undetectable in their bodies.
The consumption of chemicals like poppers and Nitrates drugs adds to the chemicals in the body which reacts to the new introduction of RFR and ELF and more so together in an attractive physics sum of Conductive + electric field = receiver/antenna
The PCR test can be manipulated as shown with Convid 19
T-cell count would be low if you had an illness / were pregnant or went out in the sunlight for too long your results could be lower than 200 and lead you to an AIDS diagnosis..
A 2021 review in the Journal of the International AIDS Society examined multiple studies and estimated:
HIV transmission risk per condomless vaginal sex act for women: 0.08% (1 in 1,250)
HIV transmission risk per act for men: 0.04% (1 in 2,500)
Women have a longer urethra and vaginal cavity compared to the male urethra, which does make them more biologically susceptible to contracting many sexually transmitted infections from exposure.
HIV is primarily transmitted through exposure to infected bodily fluids like semen, vaginal fluids, blood etc during sexual activity.
So from a purely biological standpoint, women's anatomy does make them more susceptible to potential HIV transmission from an infected partner.
So women face around double the per-act risk compared to men from vaginal intercourse exposure in this data.
If this was true this would lead to more women catching HIV and statistics show they are, however…..
The tainted blood supplies in parts of sub-Saharan Africa skewed the AIDS
Prevalence data, especially for women in those regions. There were incidents where donated blood was not properly screened and contained multiple infections like HIV, hepatitis, and others. When this contaminated blood was then used for transfusions or medical procedures, it exposed many recipients, including women, to HIV through non-sexual transmission routes.
This artificial exposure pathway from tainted blood supplies contributed to higher HIV rates among women in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, compared to if transmission occurred primarily through sexual routes based on biological susceptibility factors. Including data from sub-Saharan Africa in the global HIV/AIDS statistics skews the overall prevalence ratios between men and women.
By excluding that region's data, which was impacted by the tainted blood issue, the underlying biological factors become more apparent. Women have a longer urethra and vaginal cavity, making them inherently more susceptible to contracting sexually transmitted infections like HIV from exposure. With sub-Saharan African data removed, the HIV prevalence ratio shows around 1.58 men for every 1 woman in the rest of the world.
However, even this 1.58 ratio may be further skewed, as women and men likely receive blood transfusions at roughly equal rates in those other regions. If the 1.58 ratio was solely due to sexual transmission risks, it would be illogical for men to have a higher prevalence than women given the biological susceptibility factors for women. The potential blood transfusion exposure pathway could artificially increase the number of infected women. Therefore, there may be even stronger evidence that men contract HIV at higher rates than women through primary sexual transmission routes, which would align with biological realities. The 1.58 ratio could understate the inherent female susceptibility. https://normanjames.substack.com/p/the-potential-link-between-the-rise?utm_source=activity_item