Why
AIDS Was Invented
Jerry Leonard
12/31/01
AIDS is proving fantastically beneficial to cancer
researchers. In this e-book the author proposes that these benefits are not
coincidental and reveals that cancer researchers not only created animal
immunosuppressive viruses to do exactly what HIV does but even modified them
for growth in human cell cultures, shortly before the epidemic began.
Moreover, published human experiments with deadly
monkey cancer viruses are exposed and proposed as smaller-scale versions of the
cancer experiment which culminated in the useful epidemic of immunosuppression
and cancer associated with HIV. The surprising manner in which this
catastrophic epidemic is systematically fulfilling the long-term goals of the
cancer vaccine establishment—the very group that invented immunosuppressive
viruses—is also revealed.
For a pdf version of this e-book, click here
Why AIDS Was Invented
Jerry Leonard
“As disastrous as the spread of HIV is, the insights that the AIDS epidemic provides into the causes of cancer may ultimately lead to new and successful approaches to cancer prevention.”[1]
On the heels of one of medical science’s greatest triumphs—the vaccine against polio—researchers pursued the ultimate goal: a vaccine against human cancers. Unfortunately, unlike the case with the poliovirus, there were no known cancer viruses with which to make or test human cancer vaccines. Therefore, researchers engaged in a crash government program to isolate and characterize animal and human viruses capable of causing human cancer so they could manipulate them into serving as vaccines.[2]
In this long-range human cancer vaccine research program, scientists consistently followed the path that had already led to cancer vaccines in animals. In the effort with animal cancer viruses, tumor cells were extracted from chemically or radiation-induced tumors and turned into so-called “cell-free filtrates.” These filtrates were then injected into other animals to see if the tumors could be “transplanted.” If transplanted tumors successfully grew, the researchers assumed that these injections had contained cancer viruses (since all other cells had been filtered out).[3]
As part of this effort, researchers injected these “synthetic” cancer viruses into experimental animals with differing immune system health and genetic backgrounds. This allowed them to observe how viral cancer growth was controlled by the immune response under different host conditions. After watching how the immune system reacted to the injected cancer viruses, researchers were able to develop procedures for artificially boosting the immune system reactions they observed in the form of vaccines. By manipulating into vaccines the cancer viruses they had created, researchers now had a laboratory model for the creation and prevention of viral cancer in animals—they could give lab animals combinations of the experimental cancer viruses and vaccines (based on these or other viruses) they had created to determine the effectiveness of the cancer vaccines.
In order to replicate this successful research technique in humans,[4] researchers needed a way to induce human cancer on demand. This would allow researchers to observe cancer growth from its earliest stages[5] as well as develop and test potential human cancer vaccines. As a means of reaching this lofty goal, virologists engaged in a long-running research effort to isolate human cancer viruses from cancer patients using procedures developed in animal research.[6] The cancer-causing potential of these viruses was tested by injecting them in lab animals.
In some cases researchers went even further and conducted barbaric human “cancer transplant” experiments in which an array of human and animal cancer cells and viruses were isolated, combined and injected in human subjects to induce and measure tumor growth directly. This gave researchers the opportunity not only to monitor carefully the critical transition from health to cancer growth in human subjects, but also to look for natural immune responses to the initial challenge with cancer which might be artificially amplified with vaccines.
A similar procedure had been used in vaccine research for hepatitis (an alleged cancer-causing virus in humans). In this case mentally retarded children were injected with hepatitis so that vaccine researchers could watch the disease progress from its earliest stages. One government investigation described a study “from 1956 to 1972 [by] Dr. Saul Krugman of New York University [who] led a study team at the Willowbrook State School for the Retarded, on Staten Island, New York”:
Noting the high incidence of hepatitis among the residents of the school, nearly all of whom were profoundly mentally impaired children and adolescents, Krugman and his colleagues injected some of them with a mild form of hepatitis serum. The researchers justified their work on the grounds that the subjects probably would have become infected anyway, and they hoped to find a prophylaxis for the virus by studying it from the earliest stages of infection.[7] [emphasis added]
Human experiments involving vaccines against hepatitis would continue for years to come and can be tied directly to the outbreak of AIDS in homosexuals chosen for experimental hepatitis vaccine trials shortly before they began dying of previously rare cancers. Vaccines against hepatitis would also later be used in an ambitious international human cancer vaccine experiment (recently declared a success), which will be discussed shortly.
# # #
Unfortunately, clues to the hypothesized naturally occurring human immune response to cancer, which might be harnessed for vaccines, proved elusive. Therefore, an indirect way of determining which immune system components were critical in fighting off human cancer was investigated. This effort—which was similar to the approach used in human hepatitis research and animal cancer research—consisted of injecting cancer cells in patients with various immune system deficiencies. The hope was that if cancer cells grew more consistently in patients with immune system components that were damaged in specific ways, then these components were the keys to fighting off cancer in healthy patients. Follow-up efforts that focused on strengthening these identified components might be the key to training the human immune system to prevent cancer with vaccines.[8] Thus, it was hoped that if researchers traveled the path through “immunosuppression,” it would lead to the ultimate goal of cancer “immunocompetence” in the form of vaccines.[9]
In the 1950s researchers began to use this procedure systematically in humans in the same manner it had been used in lab animals. For example, researchers deliberately induced tumors in human subjects with compromised immune systems by injecting them with cancer cells thought to contain human cancer viruses. Clues were sought as to the immune system deficiencies responsible for increased tumor transplant growth by correlating tumor rejection rates with other measures of immune system health.
Chester Southam was a leading researcher who published numerous papers describing the use of this technique in human subjects. Southam described his methodology as follows:
The procedure, as I explained, requires simply the hypodermic injection of a suspension of tissue-cultured cells at two sites on the anterior thigh or arm and observation of the sites at about weekly intervals for six weeks or until regression is complete. These cells are of two or more cancer cell lines. These cancer cell lines were chosen because they have the necessary growth capacity to produce a measurable reaction.[10] [emphasis added]
Southam injected hundreds of healthy and diseased patients[11] with “cancer transplants” so he could measure the tumor growth and correlate it with the immune system health of the cancer transplant recipient.[12] One of the results of Southam’s dangerous tests was that the tumors he transplanted in healthy human subjects seemed to regress faster with repeated implants while the implants in cancer patients showed less favorable results:
In brief, normal recipients responded to implanted human cancer cells with a marked local inflammatory reaction and rapid complete regression of the implants within a maximum period of 3 to 4 weeks. . . . In striking contrast, however, those recipients that had advanced cancer showed little or no acute inflammatory response, the implanted cancer cells grew progressively for a period of 3 weeks or more before regression started, and some individuals failed to reject implanted cancer cells over periods of observation between 6 weeks and 6 months.[13] [emphasis added]
Southam assumed that the different reactions to cancer injections were due to the differences in the test subjects’ immune systems.[14] After watching how these tumor transplants grew in healthy patients, patients with cancer, and patients with diseases other than cancer (at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital), Southam claimed cancer patients had an immune system defect that contributed to cancer growth:
All the patients in the study undertaken at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital rejected the transplants as promptly as did the healthy persons. Thus it has been demonstrated that cancer patients lack an immune mechanism present in other individuals, including chronically diseased patients. [emphasis added]
More specifically, Southam postulated that the reason the cancer patients were more susceptible to tumor growth was due to defective cellular-based immune reactions.[15] Southam also assumed that the reason healthy patients seemed to reject the repeated tumor cell implants with greater efficiency was that they had a natural mechanism for preventing cancer that he was stimulating through injections of controlled amounts of cancer—resulting in an induced immunity. Southam wrote:
The growth of a repeat implant of the same cell type has been studied in normal recipients. The repeated implants formed smaller nodules and regressed more rapidly as judged by gross and microscopic examination. This accelerated rejection of a second implant is presumably the result of an induced immunity. [emphasis added][16]
Southam hoped that the defense mechanisms against cancer he claimed to be monitoring in these studies might be further manipulated to control cancer growth:
The studies also demonstrated a correlation between the rate of rejection of homotransplanted cancer cells and the patient’s apparent ability to restrain his own disease, thus providing additional direct evidence that patients may have immunological (defense) mechanisms to restrain their own cancer. These results, of course, give hope that, through further clinical research, methods of stimulating such mechanisms to greater efficacy can be developed. [emphasis added][17]
The question was how to make such human cancer vaccines. One of the goals of these tumor transplant studies was to identify potential human cancer viruses in the tumor transplant cells so that these viruses could be tested as vaccines. Chester Southam summarized, “If and when a causative virus of human cancers is found, it may provide a source of antigen for cancer prophylaxis, but this is merely a hope for the future.”[18]
While Southam and other researchers were able to induce tumor growth in human subjects using human tumor transplants,[19] they were not able to identify human cancer viruses in these studies.[20] Researchers had considered the possibility that animal cancer viruses that had acquired the ability to jump the species barrier—like the flu virus—might be responsible for human cancer. If it were true that animal cancer viruses could cause human cancer, then existing animal cancer vaccines might be directly applicable to humans.
As a means of examining this intriguing hypothesis, researchers began to study how cancer viruses from one species could cause cancer in other species. Cancer researchers also began to join cancer viruses from various species and grow them in human cell cultures.[21] They also began to study how animal cancer viruses might cause cancer directly in humans—by injecting human subjects with the animal cancer viruses they grew in cell cultures.
In one of these tests, researchers used a procedure similar to the one that Southam and his colleagues had used in human guinea pigs. However, in addition to injecting subjects with human cancer cell growths (such as the cancer cell line known as HeLa), they also injected a monkey cancer virus known as SV40.
In a twenty-page paper in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, researchers published table after table of the results of their attempts to induce tumors with a monkey virus in human subjects (cancer patients) of various ages and in various disease states. They began by using separate injections of human cancer cells and animal cancer viruses in different regions of the same subject’s body. Because initially only the human cancer cell implants resulted in tumors while the SV40 implants did not, researchers began to investigate systematically the mechanism by which the monkey virus SV40 could be made to cause human tumors. Experimental parameters investigated included: the length of time the SV40 was cultured in human cells, the type of human cancer cells the SV40 cancer virus was cultured with, the length of time the recipient subject had been on immunosuppressive drugs, and the dose of cancer virus cells injected.[22]
The experimentation with human subjects using the human cancer cell/monkey cancer virus cultures eventually paid off. Researchers found that by using the right mixture of human cancer cells and the SV40 virus (cultured for the proper length of time and given in sufficient quantities), the SV40 monkey cancer virus could not only reproducibly cause tumors (referred to as “nodules”) in human subjects but could also be retrieved in cells removed from induced cancer growths.[23] The authors summarized:
The formation of nodules after . . . implantation of cells from simian virus 40 (SV40) transformed human tissue culture could be correlated with the stages of the transformation process, number of cells implanted, and possibly the presence of infectious virus in the implants.
While initially the researchers had more difficulty inducing human tumors with the SV40 virus than they did with just human cancer cells (such as HeLa cancer cells), eventually they found the SV40 monkey virus, when mixed and cultured properly, could produce human tumors (characterized as sarcomas) with comparable ease:
Judging by the results of homologous implantation, HeLa cells and late passage, virus-free SV40-transformed cells had a comparable neoplastic potential. Histologically, nodules produced by SV40-transformed human cells were sarcomas.
Researchers now had a model for inducing cancer in humans using animal cancer viruses. This model allowed them to watch such cancers grow from the earliest stages under laboratory conditions.[24] They also had a model for testing vaccines for this virus, which had already been tested in animals.[25]
In yet another series of experiments of this type, but published by different authors, both human cancer patients and test monkeys were injected with a monkey tumor virus known as the Yaba virus. The Yaba virus had been tested in monkeys with the following result:
Intravenous inoculation of virus in the rhesus monkey produces widespread tumors in the subcutaneous tissues, skeletal muscle, lungs, and heart and occasionally results in the death of the monkey.[26]
Nevertheless, the virus was injected in human test subjects so that the induced tumors and immune system reactions to the virus could be measured—hopefully identifying an immune response that might be manipulated for use in human cancer vaccines. Following these virus injections, the researchers observed that “the humans developed lesions quite similar to those of the monkeys” and that “inoculation of virus produces only local tumors in the monkey and human.”[27]
The depraved nature of these experiments is compounded by the fact that the researchers used human beings as walking tissue cultures for the monkey tumor virus they were studying—alternately inducing human tumors through injection of the monkey virus, removing tissue from the induced tumors, re-injecting the virus removed from the human tumors induced, and finally inducing more tumors in other human subjects with the transplanted and processed virus. The authors summarized this process:
A cell-free filtrate of a monkey tumor was injected into three sites on the left forearm, and a tumor suspension into three sites on the right forearm of Patients 1, 2, and 3. Tumors developed at all sites. A single site was excised from the left forearm of Patient 2 at 17 days and from Patient 3 at 10 days. A suspension of each of these tumors was then injected into patient 5. . . . By this method, replication of the virus in the human was established.[28] [emphasis added]
This experimentation in which animal viruses were passaged and tested in human subjects in vaccine research is reminiscent of the Nazi concentration camp studies with typhus. In these experiments “inmates of the camp were infected with typhus for the purpose of procuring a continuing supply of fresh blood taken from persons suffering from typhus.” Having a fresh supply of such contaminated blood allowed Nazi doctors to inject patients with disease-causing blood to test vaccines. Some of these vaccines, subsequently tested directly in humans deliberately infected with the pathogenic virus to be vaccinated against, were developed using mouse viruses. As described in the Nuremburg Trials: “Other inmates, some previously immunized and some not, were infected with typhus to demonstrate the efficacy of the vaccines.”[29]
Active Immunosuppression
While researchers developed ways of causing cancer in animals—and extended these techniques to humans, the specific immune system dysfunctions which supposedly aided cancer growth still eluded them.
In addition to injecting cancer cells and viruses into subjects with naturally occurring immune system defects, there was another, more sophisticated way of determining which defects of the immune system resulted in increased cancer growth. This involved developing ways of deliberately inducing such defects so that the immune system damage could be correlated with cancer growth due to cancer transplants. Once again, if certain viruses damaged the immune system and resulted in increased cancer growth, researchers might assume that by boosting the damaged components through vaccines, cancer could be prevented.[30]
The procedure for inducing controlled immunodeficiencies allowed researchers the ability to create immune system defects on demand in the laboratory and then measure the transplantability of the cancer viruses they had developed. In addition to allowing them the flexibility of not having to find animals with natural immune system defects, it also allowed them to watch cancer grow from its earliest stages under controlled conditions.
This procedure essentially represented a four-step process in cancer vaccine research. The first step would be to inject test subjects with both immunosuppressive agents and cancer agents. The second step would be to determine which induced immune system deficiencies resulted in greater cancer growth. The third step would be to develop means of stimulating these immune system mechanisms. The fourth step would be to test these immune system-stimulating procedures in the presence of cancer injections as a means of evaluating their effectiveness as cancer vaccines.[31] Thus, by carefully inducing immunodeficiency, researchers might ultimately develop immunoproficiency against cancer.
By injecting animals with different immune system-damaging viruses along with different cancer viruses, researchers hoped to identify combinations of immunosuppressive and cancer viruses which might be occurring naturally to cause cancer in humans.[32] Thus, animal immunosuppressive and cancer viruses provided a laboratory model for cancer creation that allowed researchers to mimic processes that they suspected were causing cancer naturally in man.
As part of this research, immunosuppressive viruses with properties amazingly similar to AIDS[33] were created and tested extensively in mice throughout the 1960s.
In these experiments, researchers would inject mice with both sarcoma viruses and immunosuppressive leukemia viruses.[34] Once the leukemia viruses damaged the immune systems of the experimental mice, researchers measured the resulting cancer susceptibility (due to the sarcoma viruses) in the leukemia virus-impaired test subjects.[35]
Since immunosuppressive viruses were able to increase cancer growth dramatically in mice and cats, researchers suspected that immunosuppressive viruses were also able to increase cancer growth in humans.[36]
In order to gain a better understanding of the role of immunosuppression in human cancer, researchers began to conduct international studies of humans with immunodeficiency syndromes so they could watch cancer grow from its initial stages and correlate the type of cancer growth with viruses detected and the type of immune system dysfunction observed.[37]
In parallel with cancer studies of naturally occurring immunodeficiency diseases in humans, in the 1970s cancer researchers began growing immunodeficiency viruses they had created for animal studies in human cell cultures. They also combined the monkey virus they had used to induce human sarcoma tumors with these immunosuppressive viruses.
In the 1980s an epidemic of sarcoma cancer due to an animal immunosuppressive virus began to explode in human populations and alert scientists to the impending AIDS epidemic.[38] As it turns out, this cancer epidemic due to AIDS is proving to be highly useful to researchers seeking to develop human cancer vaccines—the group that invented and tested immunosuppressive viruses for this very reason.
The Benefits of AIDS
The AIDS virus has allowed cancer researchers to make major breakthroughs—providing long-awaited proof that viruses cause sarcoma in humans[39] and that such cancers can be controlled by the immune system (the so-called immunodeficiency theory of cancer susceptibility).
Headlines in the New York Times have announced that long-sought human cancer viruses have finally been isolated from AIDS patients suffering from the most prominent form of AIDS-related cancer called Kaposi’s sarcoma.[40] Although it is not known for sure that the virus is totally responsible for the growth of Kaposi’s sarcoma in AIDS victims, this fortuitous development is extremely encouraging to those studying the viral causes of human cancers. Lawrence Altman, writing in the New York Times, recently predicted, “Ultimately, the new findings about the Kaposi’s sarcoma virus could help unravel many unknowns about how viruses cause cancers.”
This line of research, which at long last correlated a herpes virus with the growth of Kaposi’s sarcoma in human subjects,[41] encouraged another group of researchers to look for other forms of cancer that might be caused by this same virus. These researchers have recently announced another major breakthrough in viral cancer research—finding a link between this same virus and a common form of blood cancer known as multiple myeloma, the second most prevalent form of blood cancer in the U.S.[42]
How fortunate! As a direct result of the rare cancers that form in HIV victims, cancer researchers are gaining insight into the manner in which cancer viruses and viruses which cause immune system impairment interact to cause cancer. And they are able to do this thanks to the same type of viruses which government researchers had isolated, purified and made more virulent and infectious for this very purpose.[43]
Lawrence Altman, who has been chronicling the AIDS epidemic through the New York Times, recognized the benefits of AIDS to cancer researcher at the very beginning of the epidemic. Altman predicted that the rare cancer caused by AIDS would provide insight into the causes of other types of cancer:
The sudden appearance of the cancer, called Kaposi’s sarcoma, has prompted a medical investigation that experts say could have as much scientific as public health importance because of what it may teach about determining the causes of more common types of cancer. [emphasis added][44]
This prediction came true. Another researcher more recently summarized how AIDS-related cancers are providing valuable insight into the cause of cancer in general: “The etiology and mechanism of the specific cancers that are increased with HIV infection are proving highly informative for our general understanding of cancer etiology.”[45]
As a result of this convenient new insight into the mechanisms of cancer growth, researchers are now predicting that the AIDS epidemic and the associated cancer epidemic will assist in the development of cancer prevention strategies. One author suggested, “The AIDS-malignancies have provided insights into the pathogenesis of neoplastic disease in general and into strategies for further therapeutic intervention.”[46]
Other authors in the European Journal of Cancer summarized the benefits of AIDS to cancer vaccine research in the following manner:
As disastrous as the spread of HIV is, the insights that the AIDS epidemic provides into the causes of cancer may ultimately lead to new and successful approaches to cancer prevention.[47] [emphasis added]
Indeed, the AIDS epidemic appears to be perfectly suited to providing a research vehicle to the viral cancer research effort, which invented immunosuppressive viruses to determine the links between cancer, viruses, and immunodeficiency so that cancer vaccines could be created. One author wrote of the utility of AIDS-related cancers or neoplasms to cancer prevention efforts:
The occurrence of these neoplasms offers an opportunity to study the role of viruses and immunodeficiency in development of these tumors. Also, the pathogenic mechanisms leading to specific malignancies can be elucidated. This information ought to guide development of strategies for prevention of virally determined cancers.[48] [emphasis added]
Altman provided a fitting summary of the situation:
. . . scientists saw in the tragedy of the AIDS epidemic an
extraordinary opportunity to study the interplay of viruses, an impaired immune
system and the development of cancer. In a way, AIDS research was an
extension of the war on cancer that the Government declared in 1971.[49]
[emphasis added]
It should be clear that the HIV epidemic is providing cancer researchers with extensive knowledge of human cancer viruses and the immune system reactions to them. This knowledge will certainly assist in the development of human cancer vaccines, but HIV itself may even be used in such vaccines if recent animal research is applicable to human cancer prevention. Recent cancer experiments with HIV in animals have shown that the virus can be used not only to cause cancer but to inhibit its growth in the form of cancer vaccines!
By using components of HIV in experimental vaccines against tumors (which were induced by modified forms of HIV), researchers have reportedly dissected the role of CD4 and CD8 T-cells in tumor prevention through immunosurveillance. One group of scientists reported, “This model has allowed us to begin to dissect some of the mechanisms mediating and regulating tumor immunosurveillance.” The researchers who conducted this experiment optimistically noted that this line of experimentation with HIV “may provide a successful concerted approach to cancer immunotherapy.” [50]
Whether HIV will be used directly as a cancer vaccine in humans in a similar manner remains to be seen. However, HIV may have much more far-reaching medical uses than cancer vaccines—as stunning as that achievement might be. Specifically, the use of HIV in the brave new world of genetic therapy in humans looks promising.
Indeed, HIV has the potential to be a very useful experimental and therapeutic virus with broad biomedical applications.[51] Amazingly enough, researchers have begun using the HIV virus itself as a viral “vector” for the controversial line of medicine known as gene therapy—at least in the laboratory. By deleting certain genes in the deadly AIDS virus, researchers have been able to exploit its unique infectious properties while eliminating its harmful capacity. Andrew Pollack wrote in the New York Times:
In a bold but potentially frightening effort to turn one of the world’s most virulent killers into a cure, scientists and biotechnology companies are trying to tame the AIDS virus and harness it to treat disease. The scientists say they have stripped the human immunodeficiency virus of its ability to cause disease, while leaving intact its ability to infect human cells. Such a crippled virus, they say, could be used to deliver genes in to human cells for gene therapy. [emphasis added]
As a result of laboratory tests, the subfamily of viruses to which HIV belongs is thought to be one of those most suited for the emerging technology of genetic therapy. This type of virus, the lentivirus, seems to have infectious properties which render it superior to other viruses for the insertion of genes in human DNA. This includes the DNA of nondividing cells, which pose a barrier to other types of viral vectors. Pollack noted:
H.I.V., on the other hand, is both cunning at evading the body’s immune defenses and can carry large genes. Most important, it is one of a small class of viruses, known as lentiviruses, that can incorporate genes into the chromosomes even of nondividing cells.[52]
This convenient infectious property, together with its carrying capacity, makes HIV one of the more promising ones for use in human clinical gene therapy trials.
* * *
It should be clear that the cancer epidemic due to AIDS is proving fantastically beneficial to cancer researchers, but the question needs to be asked: Are these stunning developments merely due to coincidence? Altman had noted, “In a way, AIDS research was an extension of the war on cancer that the Government declared in 1971.” Is there more to Altman’s comment than meets the eye?
Could researchers have caused the AIDS/cancer epidemic using the tools they had developed in the government’s war on cancer? Did they continue in their human experiments with cancer-causing monkey viruses and escalate to the use of “active” immunosuppression with the monkey immunosuppressive viruses they developed for animal cancer experiments?
In the human experiments with SV40 tumor transplants, researchers mimicked active immunosuppressive experiments that were conducted by Chester Southam in animals. In Southam’s animal experiments, he gave mice treatments that disabled their immune systems in an attempt to increase tumor growth due to cancer virus injections.[53] In the SV40 experiments with humans, patients undergoing immunosuppressive treatments for cancer were injected with the cancer-causing monkey virus SV40 to determine both whether such viruses were capable of causing human cancer and whether immunosuppression aided such cancer growth.[54]
The SV40 researchers even got to use one of the same immunosuppressive treatments (an immunosuppressive chemical known as Cytoxan) in their human transplant studies[55] that Southam used in cancer transplant studies in mice.[56], [57]
Since cancer researchers routinely used experimental cancer-induction procedures in humans that they developed in animals, it is natural to ask whether, in addition to immunosuppressive chemicals, researchers have also used monkey immunosuppressive viruses in conjunction with SV40 or other cancer virus transplants in humans.
Curiously, monkey immunosuppressive viruses were not only available to researchers prior to AIDS but were mixed with the SV40 virus and propagated in human cell cultures!
While the public is completely ignorant of this fact, simian immunosuppressive viruses (SIVs) such as the Mason Pfizer Monkey Virus (MPMV)—one of three types of SIV[58]—were available to researchers as early as 1970 when the virus was grown in cell cultures.[59] Well before AIDS, MPMV was shown to induce immunodeficiency states in monkeys in the early 1970s[60], [61] as well as the 1980s.[62]
In one of these early experiments, MPMV was mixed with SV40—the monkey cancer virus (which had already been injected in humans to cause cancer)—and the Rous sarcoma virus in human cell cultures.[63] Researchers also mixed the immunosuppressive virus with simian sarcoma virus.[64]
Is it not curious that cancer researchers were mixing immunosuppressive monkey viruses with sarcomas and coaxing them to grow in human cells in the late 1970s—just before HIV broke out in human populations and caused an epidemic of immunosuppression and sarcoma? Could this epidemic have been an extension of the human tumor transplant experiments with SV40, using the technology perfected over decades of research with animal immunodeficiency viruses?
* * *
If researchers were going to use animal immunosuppressive viruses to conduct such experiments in man, how might they have been conducted? It would make sense for researchers to use vehicles that would allow them not only to inject subjects with viruses but to conduct follow-up studies to see how the immunosuppressive and cancer viruses resulted in immune system destruction[65] and cancer growth. Vaccine programs meet these criteria and are the perfect vehicles for implementing such experiments.
Prior to AIDS, the world’s medical elite was well aware of the usefulness of immunosuppressive viruses to cancer research:
· World Health Organization (WHO) representatives had made statements expressing their desire that the organization get involved in research with immunosuppressive viruses capable of selectively targeting T-cells.[66] (Researchers associated with WHO were optimistic that the immunosuppressive research conducted in animals could be usefully extended to human beings.[67])
· Members of WHO had also recommended that experimental agents be placed in vaccines as a vehicle for measuring the human immune response on a global scale[68] (as a means of separating genetic from environmental determinants of immune system function).
· A report by a WHO study group had also recommended an international study of naturally immunosuppressed humans with immunological deficiency syndromes for cancer research purposes (this was prior to the emergence of the international Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome epidemic)![69]
Did WHO achieve all of these goals simultaneously by placing immunosuppressive agents in some of its vaccines, thereby creating a highly useful international epidemic of acquired immunodeficiency syndromes and cancer resulting from selective T-cell depletion?
The possibility that increased cancer rates due to infectious agents present in vaccines would be useful for cancer vaccine research was evident in the 1967 report of the Special Virus-Leukemia Program. Projects were initiated to correlate cancer deaths of children and veterans with vaccines they may have received (as compared to “matched control groups”). One project recommended that a massive database be constructed and maintained by obtaining “death certificates for all U.S. children under 15 years of age who have died of cancer, 1960-1964” so that cancer deaths could correlated with names “of children believed to be at unusual risk of cancer; e.g., those given certain vaccines in the past.” Were similar databases created for vaccine recipients who were deliberately predisposed to cancer through vaccines?[70]
Unfortunately, there is evidence to support the radical hypothesis that humanitarian vaccine programs were used to conduct inhumane cancer experiments. Promiscuous homosexuals were selectively targeted with an experimental vaccine against hepatitis B beginning in the late 1970s.[71] And the AIDS epidemic in promiscuous homosexuals began almost immediately after the first of these vaccine experiments.[72] It has been documented that recipients of this experimental hepatitis vaccine have been disproportionately afflicted with AIDS[73] and that immunosuppressed homosexuals are being targeted with numerous follow-up studies to monitor how cancer develops in immunosuppressed victims versus healthy populations.[74]
Interestingly enough, the suspect experimental hepatitis B vaccine given to homosexuals just prior to the AIDS epidemic appears to have been a subset of a proposed global cancer vaccine experiment administered by the World Health Organization.[75] It was thought that hepatitis B was the cause of a form of cancer called hepatocellular carcinoma and that by immunizing people against hepatitis, immunity to this form of cancer might be obtained.[76] Hepatitis B vaccination trials were conducted as a means of developing vaccines for use in these international hepatitis/cancer vaccine trials.[77] (Hepatitis was also mentioned in WHO publications discussing the experimental merits of extending animal immunosuppressive techniques to human research.)
Given the admitted experimental nature of this cancer vaccine effort employing hepatitis vaccines, and, given the useful immunosuppression subsequently associated with one branch of it, it seems logical to ask: Was this direct attempt at cancer vaccination using the hepatitis B vaccine augmented through the addition of immunosuppressive viruses, as was done in experimental animal populations?[78] In other words, was there a covert cancer vaccine experiment within the overt cancer vaccine experiment associated with the hepatitis B program? Could this explain why immunosuppression in homosexual populations is proving so beneficial to cancer research?
Such a procedure would represent the replication in human populations of a published experiment conducted in cats in which kittens were injected with a “vaccine” containing a mixture of immunosuppressive viruses and cancer agents.
The authors of this study noted:
Four-week-old specific-pathogen-free cats were immunized with a combined vaccine composed of killed feline leukemia virus and killed feline oncornavirus-associated cell membrane antigen-containing tumor cells.
The authors further explained that the immunosuppressive leukemia virus present in the vaccine increased susceptibility to the oncornavirus cancer agents: “Thus, it appears that the protective immunity to feline oncornavirus disease was hindered rather than enhanced by inclusion of inactivated, purified FeLV as a vaccine component.”[79]
The Source of the International AIDS Epidemic
In addition to the AIDS outbreak in American homosexuals, there is evidence supporting the theory that the international HIV epidemic is also the result of a premeditated international “cancer vaccine” experiment implemented using existing vaccine programs associated with the World Health Organization.
While gay recipients of the hepatitis B/cancer vaccination program have been disproportionately stricken by the AIDS virus, according to a front page article in The Times of London, it is a segment of the recipients of the international smallpox vaccination administered by the WHO which have been disproportionately afflicted with AIDS in the developing world. Pearce Wright summarized in the Times:
The World Health Organization, which masterminded the 13 year campaign, is studying new scientific evidence suggesting that immunization with the smallpox vaccine Vaccinia awakened the unsuspected, dormant human immuno defence virus infection (HIV).[80]
The Times elaborated, “The smallpox vaccine theory would account for the position of each of the seven Central African states which top the league table of most affected countries; why Brazil became the most afflicted Latin American country; and how Haiti became the route for the spread of Aids to the U.S.”
Conclusion
AIDS is providing a fantastic laboratory model on a large-scale—essentially duplicating research efforts conducted earlier on a smaller-scale to prove the immunodeficiency and virus model of cancer growth. For example, AIDS is providing answers that studies of immunosuppressed transplant patients and children with naturally occurring immune deficiency syndromes sought with respect to the viral nature of cancer and the breakdown of the immunological surveillance mechanism.[81]
Indeed, the AIDS epidemic is providing a near ideal research vehicle for proving theories about cancer causation that were popular shortly before the epidemic broke out. In 1972 the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published numerous articles speculating not only on the relationship between immunodeficiency[82] and viruses[83] in cancer formation, but specifically on the relationship between herpes viruses and cancers.[84] AIDS has made international headlines apparently showing that immunodeficiencies can be a major contributor to cancer due to viruses and that one of the main forms of cancer due to such immunodeficiencies—Kaposi’s sarcoma—is due to a herpes virus.
Thus, in addition to providing evidence that the “breakdown of the immunological surveillance mechanism” can lead to cancer, AIDS is helping to identify the specific viruses involved in the resultant conversion to cancer. Consequently, the damage inflicted by HIV on the immunological surveillance mechanism will be useful in the development of cancer vaccines and, as is evident in animal experiments, the deadly AIDS virus itself may even be used in experimental human cancer vaccines.
In summary, it seems improbable that, by sheer chance, an
unprecedented epidemic infection due to a type of virus invented by cancer
researchers began benefiting cancer researchers almost immediately after they
grew it in human cell cultures.
Given the immense benefits of the disease in combination with the history of human experimentation with cancer-causing viruses by the cancer research establishment, it seems more likely that AIDS is the result of human experimentation and not accident. This type of human experimentation would be directly in line with the type of cancer research perfected over decades of animal experiments with immunosuppressive viruses. It would also represent the culmination of a long series of experiments in humans in which immunosuppression was exploited as a mechanism to induce cancer by various means (including monkey sarcoma viruses) in the search for cancer vaccines.
While this conclusion may seem extreme, the open medical literature contains many surprises that run contrary to what a blind faith in the medical research establishment would foster. One can only wonder what surprises the classified records of the CIA (which had an entire wing of a hospital to experiment in as part of its MKULTRA program[85]) and the National Cancer Institute hold. It is hoped that this brief study will provide insight into what areas should be further investigated.
* * *
A more detailed study, titled AIDS: THE “PERFECT” DISEASE, which examines not only the cancer research benefits of AIDS described above, but also the benefits to the national security establishment, is available at http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore/.
In this study, disturbing links between the national cancer research establishment and the biowarfare establishment are revealed as is the manner in which AIDS is helping to fulfill long-standing national security goals related to international population control in addition to fulfilling the goals of the cancer vaccine research establishment. Additionally, the sordid history of previously secret national and international testing programs of the U.S. government is reviewed. The proposed cancer experiment to explain the AIDS epidemic is placed within the context of this backdrop of unethical human experimentation under humanitarian pretexts. These unconscionable testing programs serve as a warning to those who would doubt that an experiment of the size and scope of that proposed to explain the AIDS epidemic could and would be carried out by the U.S. government under the auspices of cancer research.